CC ISP Mobility Concepts by Chad Magill

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

Mobility Concepts

August 2011

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan Mobility Concepts

................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................

Table of Contents

01 02 05 08 11 14 17 19 21 23

Introduction Downtown Transit Circulator Concept Bike/Pedestrian Treatments Hike â&#x20AC;&#x201D; Bike Trails Concept Plan Roundabout Implementation Plan Road Diet Implementation Plan Corridor Mobility Concepts: Leopard Street/Annaville Corridor Mobility Concepts: Lipes Boulevard Corridor Mobility Concepts: Ocean Drive Corridor Mobility Concepts: Old Brownsville Road

Introduction

In April of 2010, the City of Corpus Christi received $2.7M in direct allocation Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds from the Department of Energy (DOE) as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The largest of the nine projects funded by the EECBG grant was the creation of an Integrated Community Energy Efficiency/Sustainability Plan and Implementation Program. One critical part of the planning effort was consideration of strategies to enhance the efficiency with which people and goods move within the community. Sustainable mobility solutions provide context-sensitive, multimodal transportation choices that support economic growth and social equity while protecting natural resources and promoting public health and safety. A community can make significant progress toward achieving these objectives by designing and building Complete streetsâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;streets that accommodate the needs of all users no matter their age or ability, and allow for choice in mode of travel. Using key roadways and corridors associated with the Destination Nodes as examples, the planning team made specific recommendations as to how various complete street concepts might be applied, including: Downtown Transit Circulator In order to promote economic growth and social equity through transportation alternatives, the planning team developed preliminary concept plans for a downtown transit circulator. Such a system would be a key step in creating a vibrant downtown district because it would provide connections to key destinations and enhance walkability. Bike/Pedestrian Treatments at Intersections Busy intersections and midblock crossing locations are often intimidating places for bicyclists and pedestrians. As such, in the interest of enhancing walkability and promoting overall community livability, the planning team provided a range of design alternatives, or treatments, to create safer, more compact crossing locations. These model treatments could apply to a number of locations around the community. Hike/Bike Trails Hike and bike trails provide transportation alternatives and recreational opportunities and promote public health and wellness. As such, the planning team identified potential routes and facilities for non-motorized connections between key community locations. Connections include on-street bike lanes as well as existing natural land features, utility corridors, and other open space that might become part of a trail network. Roundabouts Modern roundabouts can significantly improve traffic flow and safety at intersections. Because they reduce speeds while keeping traffic moving, roundabouts help meet environmental quality as well as livability objectives because they reduce fuel consumption and emissions. Roundabouts also serve as landmark features, thus creating a strong sense of place, and they are very friendly for pedestrians and cyclists because they provide refuge areas and encourage slow speeds. Using one of the Destination Nodes as a case example, the planÂŹning team provided design considerations and outline key steps for retrofit roundabout installation. Road Diets The road diet concept involves removing unneeded travel lanes from target roadways and rededicating the space for other travel modes or uses, such as on-street bike lanes or parking. Road diet projects promote public health and safety by reducing vehicle speeds and creating a safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists, all while making traffic operations more efficient. As part of this planning effort, the planning team identified candidate roadway segments for road diets and suggested key steps for implementation.

Page 01

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT CONTEXT The 2006 Downtown Redevelopment Committee (DRC) Report established a vision for Downtown Corpus Christi: “Downtown Corpus Christi is a safe, clean, pedestrian friendly community comprised of a central business district, arts and culture, sports and entertainment areas. This unique, vibrant waterfront community will provide local residents, tourists, and families opportunities to enjoy its ﬁne restaurants, shops and residential facilities.”

STREETCAR 101 FUNCTIONS / PURPOSE There are two primary functions of streetcar systems: • Connecting ° Pedestrians are the primary riders

Downtown Corpus Christi needs key projects to catalyze positive growth and momentum. Strategic investment in a multi-modal transportation system is one of the principal ways by which this momentum can be realized. The confluence of key community and transit planning efforts, new leadership at the City and transit agency, and rising fuel costs have created a social and political landscape that is more favorable for transit development than at other point in the City’s history. To realize the downtown vision, the City requires an efficient downtown circulation system that will help create “people places”, serve as a catalyst for quality development, and promotes the downtown experience. A streetcar in downtown Corpus Christi would enhance the sense of place and the character of visitors’ experiences.

° Short trips in urban districts are made more efficient ° Activities and destinations are linked • Shaping ° Redevelopment initiatives are encouraged ° Retail and active uses are enhanced ° Public/private investment is maximized

Although Downtown Corpus Christi is currently served by transit in the form of three trolley lines and a seasonal ferry service, the trolleys run on 30-minute or 60-minute headways, providing little overall convenience to residents and visitors and low efficiency in mobility. Further, the existing system has not had a notable effect on development or the retail environment. The two main components of Corpus Christi’s downtown—the bar and restaurant district to the south and the arts and entertainment district to the north, for which there is only a single point of ingress/egress—are currently separated by the IH 37/US 181 corridor. This geography results in severe congestion, travel delays, and dangerous driving conditions after special events of any size. The implementation of a downtown circulator system would provide reliable connectivity between the north and south lobes of downtown and is the key to creating a “park once” district, therein providing an alternative to personal automobile travel and greatly enhancing the efficiency of the access to the IH 37/US 181 system.

POTENTIAL BENEFITS • • • •

Provide effective linkage between activity centers / districts Create one or more park-once districts/address event-driven parking Support redevelopment and infill opportunities Create a sense of place

TYPICAL STREETCAR PARAMETERS • • • • • •

Run by overhead electric power (catenary or string wire) Run in-street on steel rails, generally sharing traffic lanes Typically 33% of the cost of and about 65% of passenger capacity of light rail Total costs typical range from $20-25 million per track mile, including vehicles, electrification, and maintenance facility Typical starter system is approximately 2.5 miles, with an initial fleet of 4-5 vehicles Can be built quickly with track construction averaging 3-4 weeks per 700-foot length of track

INVESTMENT POTENTIAL “Street Smart – Streetcars and Cities in the 21st Century” (Edited by Gloria Ohland and Shelley Poticha) provides an interesting summary of streetcar projects and associated economic activity. The four systems documented are:

The Downtown Vision Plan highlighted the need for inﬁll and new development along with streetscape improvements on the Schatzel Street, Peoples Street, and Chaparral Street corridors.

Various places are illustrated within the proposed Destination Bayfront, extending roughly between Coopers Alley and Furman Avenue, and centered at the Zocalo, the “central square” located on the site of the former Coliseum extending across to the existing jetty.

• • • •

Kenosha, WI - Initial investment of $6.2 million, with development investment of $150 million, resulting in a return on investment (ROI) of 2,319%. Little Rock, AR - Initial investment of $19.6 million with development investment of $200 million, resulting in a ROI of 920%. Tampa, FL - Initial investment of $48 million, with development investment of $1.5 billion ($600 million public, $900 million private), resulting in a ROI of 1,970%. Portland, OR - Initial investment and first extension if $73 million with development investment of $2.4 billion, resulting in a ROI of 3,288%.

Page 02

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT TRANSIT CIRCULATOR ALIGNMENT DEVELOPMENT AND PHASING

POTENTIAL STREETCAR ALIGNMENTS

A downtown transit circulator would serve as a pedestrian accelerator to expand the walk-shed of downtown area trips, provide connections to key destinations throughout downtown within four distinct districts (Uptown, Downtown, SEA Town, and Destination Bayfront) and catalyze economic development. The layout of preliminary potential streetcar alignments and primary stations presented here is based on these three primary functions of a downtown circulator system, as well as consideration of the existing downtown area plans and studies, such as the Corpus Christi Downtown Vision Plan (Sasaki, December 2008) and Placemaking at Destination Bayfront (Project for Public Spaces, November 2010). The downtown circulator system will promote private investment in the form of transit-oriented development around system infrastructure, thereby promoting the growth of commerce on a scale that is conducive to non-vehicular modes of travel. The suite of new land use codes under development as part of the City’s Integrated Community Sustainability Plan will facilitate this fundamental shift toward more compact, mixed-use development.

Industrial Industr ria al Ca Canal Har

bor

S S.E.A. Town Expansion Expa

Parking Structur Structure Parking Structure Resaca

y ortunit ar Opp Streetc

Mix-used/ Eco Community Opportunity

Chaparral

Streetcar Opportunity

John

Taylor Starr

Sart

ain

Destination Bayfront District

Kinn

e Park Av

Mann Twigg

Stree tcar Opp ortu nity

Uptown District

Mix-used Residential Opportunity

gthen Stren Street s le p a t S

Green Comanche Street

Corpus Christi Bay

Peoples Scha tzel

Water

Mix-used Residential Opportunity

Staples

Transit Hub

Leopard

Enhance Green Buﬀ

Uptown

Carancahua

Tancahua

Downtown District Mix-used Residential Opportunity

en treet

Power

Institutional Opportunity

Streetcar Opportunity

New Green Downtown Gateway

High Density Residential Opportunity

Water

Re -al ign ed US Ro ute 18 1

Northern Extension to SEA Town • Length = 1.8 mile with 6 proposed stations • Connect Downtown and SEA Town districts • Link downtown bars/restaurants with sports, entertainment, and arts venues north of downtown such as American Bank Center, Whataburger Field, Art Museum of South Texas, Museum of Science and History, Harbor Playhouse, and Asian Culture Museum • Route: Use couplet of Chaparral Street/Water Street, transitioning to Chaparral Street/Mesquite Street from Heritage Park to the north • Potential maintenance facility to be located in SEA Town (although streetcars would need to be transported to this facility via truck under the proposed starter line configuration)

Mesq

uite

Potential Maintenance Facility

Starter Line • Length = 2.3 miles with 9 proposed stations • Connect the Uptown and Downtown districts • Link the Uptown Transit Hub on Staples Street, City Hall, County Courthouse, Library, and Historic Downtown. • Route: Down the Bluff via Lipan Street to John Sartain Street and up the Bluff via Schatzel Street to Leopard Street

Future Extension South to Destination Bayfront • Length = 1.0 mile with 4 proposed stations • Potential redevelopment opportunities along Chaparral Street/Water Street in vicinity of Destination Bayfront • Route: Use couplet of Chaparral Street/Water Street with transition to Water Street/Shoreline Boulevard • Although not shown on the route alignment graphic, this future southern extension could also potentially be extended further to the south beyond Park Avenue to Elizabeth Street in order to provide connections to Christus Spohn Hospital Shoreline, the Holiday Inn (and other hotels), and Cole Park.

S.E.A. Town District

Shoreli

Potential Streetcar Corridors Several opportunities exist for implementing streetcar transit in downtown. The downtown map at the right shows potential alignments that may be suitable for streetcar service based on an initial look at current and planned downtown development, areas of activity, and opportunities for inﬁll development and redevelopment identiﬁed in the planning for the concept plans for Downtown as presented in other sections of this Integrated Community Sustainability Plan. The following summarizes the potential streetcar corridors shown:

Initial Phase Later Phase Extension Potential Station

DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT Page 03

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT FEASIBILITY STUDY

IMPLEMENTATION Funding Public and private leadership and investment are essential components to funding a downtown circulator system. For example, the pie chart below shows the various funding sources used in Portland, Oregon to fund the development of their streetcar system. In addition to the funding sources pioneered by the Portland project, other revenue sources for similar projects nationwide include: • • • • • •

FTA “Livable Communities” and TCSP grants (Little Rock) State grants and appropriations (Seattle, Winston-Salem, Charlotte and Miami) Local option sales tax (Miami, Charlotte) Local General Fund appropriations (Little Rock, Galveston) Flexed STP funds (Little Rock) Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant funding (Tampa)

The next step towards implementing a Downtown Transit Circulator is to complete a feasibility study. Such a study should include the following primary elements: • Concept Development and Refinement ° Develop and evaluate transit districts, service areas, and markets ° Identify population and employment concentrations and opportunities/constraints ° Evaluate the most feasible routes for initial starter systems ° Evaluate additional longer term phases and potential vehicle/vessel options ° Review major utility impacts ° Evaluate area parking impacts and opportunities ° Develop conceptual operation/maintenance plan and facility locations and concepts ° Identify and map development opportunities ° Prepare conceptual alignment plans • Planning and Project Development ° Develop preliminary sketch-level ridership estimates ° Evaluate and quantify development impacts and potential revenue generation ° Identify possible plan and ordinance changes needed for project implementation ° Determine environmental requirements for project implementation ° Estimate capital and operating/maintenance costs ° Review and evaluate funding opportunities, including local revenue tools ° Develop implementation action list

Funding sources used for development of the Portland streetcar project, totaling $54.6 million.

DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT Page 04

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan BIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS MIDBLOCK CROSSINGS Pedestrians often have a desire and need to move freely across streets where they live, shop, go to school, enter and exit transit, and work, and they will often go up to 150 feet out of their direction of travel in order to reach a well-designed, safe crossing. For blocks longer than 400-500 feet, there may be a need to place crossings and crossing islands mid-block. Suburban locations sometimes have signal spacing of 1,400 to 8,000 feet, making designated crossing locations inconvenient. The City of Corpus Christi has designated mid-block crossings in some locations, such as along Port Avenue. The installation and placement of additional mid-block crossings should be considered on roadways with long blocks or with high pedestrian or transit use. The same key principles should guide the design of crossings and crossing islands at all locations: minimize crossing distances, select convenient crossing locations, and avoid surprise conditions.

RRFBS RAISED CROSSINGS Raised crosswalks, either with or without the median refuge, visually cue the drivers to the pedestrian path and act as speed humps in slowing traﬃc. Raised crossings might be considered on minor or residential collector streets, where traﬃc calming is needed in the area of a pedestrian crossing location.

RAISED MEDIAN WITH REFUGE Separate conﬂicts in time and location through use of median islands. Raised medians create a refuge for crossing pedestrians, allowing them a ‘safe’ resting point and allowing them to cross the roadway in two stages. Use of these islands becomes more important at higher volumes and speeds. The crossing refuge may be raised, or may be ﬂush with the roadway.

Extreme care should be used when designing a marked mid-block crossing. Markings and conventional warning signage should not typically be used as stand-alone treatments at crossings on multi-lane roads or on roads with high speeds or heavy traffic volumes. FHWA’s Safety Effects of Marked Versus Unmarked Crosswalks at Uncontrolled Locations should be consulted with regard to appropriate treatments at potential crossing locations under different traffic and roadway conditions. There are a number of advanced traffic control options available to provide additional visibility and enhanced safety at difficult crossings:

Standard overhead signs and side mounted beacons are used as warning devices to alert motorists of the crossing area and to warn drivers to yield to those in the crosswalk.

Angling the crossing through the median or island forces the pedestrian (or bicyclist) to “face” the oncoming traﬃc. Angle the crosswalk opening within refuge islands by 45 degrees toward traﬃc to force pedestrians to look toward drivers before going forward across the far-side travel lane.

STAGGERED Z CROSSINGS Similar to an angled crossing this crossing occurs at a lower volume side street. In this type of crossing, the side street travel is restricted to right in/ right out only movements, and the crossing occurs on the upstream side of the cross street so that the pedestrian movement does not conﬂict with the right out movement. This type of crossing might be desired on a roadway with a high number of cross streets and driveways, but with wide spacing between signalized intersections.

PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACONS Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (also known as HAWK crossings) can be used in locations where a full traﬃc signal is not warranted. The HAWK consists of a standard traﬃc signal RED-RED over YELLOW format. The unit is dark until activated by a pedestrian. When pedestrians wish to cross the street, they press a button which activates a warning FLASHING YELLOW light on the main street. The indication then changes to a SOLID YELLOW advising drivers to prepare to stop. The signal then displays a DUAL SOLID RED and shows the pedestrian a WALK symbol. The beacon then displays an ALTERNATING FLASHING RED and the pedestrian is shown a FLASHING DON’T WALK with a “countdown” signal advising them of the time left to cross. The 2009 MUTCD contains guidance on when this type of crossing may be appropriate, including the following:

OVERHEAD SIGNS & SIDE MOUNTED BEACONS

STAGGERED OR ANGLED CROSSING WITH REFUGE

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) have shown great promise in increasing the percentage of motorists who yield to pedestrians. The lights are mounted immediately below the standard pedestrian crossing warning signs placed at the crosswalk (on both the outside of the road and within the median). The City of St. Petersburg, Florida has experimented with these signs at numerous midblock crossing locations on four-lane roadways and has found that motorists yield to crossing pedestrians over 82% of the time, compared to an average of only 11% with side-mounted round ﬂashing beacons. These RRFBs and warning signs should be supplemented with advance pedestrian warning signs and advance yield lines placed approx. 20-50 feet in advance of the crosswalk.

INPAVEMENT LIGHTS Pedestrian actuated, ﬂashing, inpavement warning lights illuminate when activated by a pedestrian crossing or desiring to cross at a particular location.

If a traffic control signal is not justified under the signal warrants of Chapter 4C and if gaps in traffic are not adequate to permit pedestrians to cross, or if the speed for vehicles approaching on the major street is too high to permit pedestrians to cross, or if pedestrian delay is excessive, the need for a pedestrian hybrid beacon should be considered on the basis of an engineering study that considers major-street volumes, speeds, widths, and gaps in conjunction with pedestrian volumes, walking speeds, and delay.

Page 05

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan BIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS CROSSING TREATMENTS

INTERSECTION TREATMENTS

The pedestrian crossing treatment used at all crossings, mid-block, signalized, or other, should be visible and alert motorists to the potential interaction with pedestrians. Well marked crossings are essential to good walking environments. Zebra or ladder style crosswalk markings are more visible to motorists and should be used in areas of high pedestrian activity or crossings of special emphasis. Ladder style markings are preferred by visually impaired people, since the ladder rails (shore lines) help guide them across streets. Wellmarked crosswalks provide these essential services:

• Alert motorists to potential pedestrian conflict areas.

• Increase motorists yielding to pedestrians. • Enhance motorists’ recognition of intersections. • Assist people with visual impairment in their crossings.

• Attract pedestrians to the best crossing places with the most appropriate sight distances

HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK • Zebra or ladder striping • Stamped painted asphalt or

Intersections are places of managed conflict and are often very intimidating places for pedestrians. Efficiently designed intersections keep configurations compact, limit the number and width of lanes, keep speeds low, and keep costs of roadway systems affordable.

CHANNELIZED RIGHT TURN LANE WITH PEDESTRIAN REFUGE Excessively wide intersections increase the amount of time needed for a pedestrian to safely cross and discourage pedestrian use. Right turn channelizing islands (sometimes called “pork chops”) minimize pedestrian crossing times and distances, in some cases from 120160 feet to only 50-60 feet. At signalized intersections, the use of right turn islands also reduces the required pedestrian signal clearance interval time (ﬂashing don’t walk) due to the shorter crossing distance. Many existing right turn lanes are not safe for pedestrians. One contemporary strategy (sometimes referred to as “Australian rights” or “Gap Acceptance Right Turns”) provides tighter angles, better pedestrian visibility and crossing safety, and improved motorist sightlines. For crossings of channelized right turn lanes where motorist yielding behavior may be problematic, raised speed tables between the edge of the roadway and the island may be an appropriate treatment. Raised crossings at these locations have proven to increase the instances of motorists yielding to pedestrians and slow speeds in advance of right turns.

brick treatment (may be used for aesthetic or urban form reasons but should be designed and maintained to remain highly visible)

MEDIAN NOSES Median noses can be used to help provide a protective refuge for any pedestrians caught in the middle of the street during a crossing and to help control the speeds of left turning vehicles. Noses can be deep (6-12 feet) shallow (2-4 feet), or set behind crosswalks when no further extensions are possible. In rare cases, crosswalks can be skewed a few degrees in order to get median noses to ﬁt, although more than a few degrees of skew can be problematic to the visually impaired. With careful design, it is possible to include median noses on many intersections.

STOP BAR PLACEMENT

RAISED INTERSECTION A raised intersection is similar to a raised crosswalk, except that the entire intersection is elevated rather than just the crosswalk area. This creates a vertical traﬃc calming installation used to slow traﬃc through an intersection and places pedestrians and vehicles on the same plane. This provides a safety advantage for pedestrians, as it puts them on “equal footing” with vehicles. Raised intersections are generally installed on residential or minor collector streets and avoided on higher volume streets. The gentle ramps that lead to the heart of the intersection and the large raised area are designed to avoid damage to large vehicles and emergency response vehicles.

CURB EXTENSIONS Curb extensions lengthen the curb line into the street, narrowing the street at intersections or mid-block and reallocating a portion of street space to pedestrians or ancillary uses. They are most often used in residential neighborhoods and downtown commercial areas. Also known as bulbouts, popouts, or neckdowns, curb extensions increase drivers’ awareness of pedestrians, decrease crossing distance, reduce pedestrian exposure to traﬃc, and reduce traﬃc speeds. Studies show that curb extensions, when combined with a marked crosswalk, increase the number of vehicles yielding to pedestrians waiting to cross the street. Curb extensions also may be used to make the street more amenable by providing space for landscaping, art, lighting, signage or street furniture. When used with on-street parking, they also provide protection for vehicles parked behind the bulbout. Curb extensions may also provide an area for street trees, landscaping, or vegetated areas for stormwater attenuation.

APPROPRIATE CORNER RADII Large intersection and driveway corner radii create longer crossing distances for pedestrians and encourage higher vehicle turning speeds, which can put pedestrians in danger. If a particular intersection has a low turning volume of trucks and buses, smaller corner radii of 20-30 feet can be used.

Stop lines are most often placed 4-6 feet back from marked crosswalks at intersections. Lines placed up to 10 feet back from crosswalk markings are an important option (when sight distance permits) in order to reduce encroachment into the cross walk by vehicles. At midblock crosswalks, stop bars (or advance yield lines) should be placed 20-30 feet back from the crosswalk on two-lane roadways and 30-50 feet back from the crosswalk on multilane roadways; the further setback on multilane roadways is needed to accommodate vehicle sight distance of crossing pedestrians and to prevent multiple threat crashes (where a vehicle in one lane stops but a vehicle in an adjacent lane has their view of the crossing pedestrian blocked and does not stop).

Page 06

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan BIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS SIGNALIZATION

ADA ACCESS UNIVERSAL DESIGN

All signalized intersections require well maintained pedestrian signal heads on all legs. When signal heads are omitted pedestrians may not know when they are permitted to cross. Per current design guidelines, the pedestrian clearance phase at signals should be set for walking rates of 3.5 feet per second, with 3.0 feet per second in areas with a signiﬁcant population of seniors or those with disabilities. The walk phase for crossings should be no less than 4 seconds, with a minimum 7 seconds as a more common time. Several other pedestrian accommodations can be incorporated at signalized locations to improve the operation and interaction of pedestrians and bicyclists within the intersection. These include:

Sidewalks, crossings, entire blocks and corridors, parking lots, parks, waterfronts, and trails must be designed to work for people of all abilities (universal design). Retroﬁts should be planned for those features lacking ADA-compliant curb ramps. The highest priority should be placed on features near transit, medical care facilities, and locations where special populations are most commonly found. Well-designed facilities include adequate widths for turning and maneuvering wheelchairs, landscaping and other guidance to help all people remain oriented toward crossings (two curb ramps per corner are best), and utilities and other features that present no barriers to safe passage for all users.

PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN Pedestrian countdown signals give crossing pedestrians an indication of how much time they have left to complete their crossing and end much of the confusion that standard signal heads create (“I only had four seconds to cross the street before the hand started to ﬂash at me”). They also give a clear idea of actual time left to complete the crossing. Countdown signals should be used on all new construction projects, and should be used as a retroﬁt replacement of older pedestrian signals particularly on multi-lane roadways.

PPEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTONS P Pedestrian push buttons provide immediate feedback to useers concerning a request made for a pedestrian phase, simillar to elevator buttons that light up when pushed.

General Design Guidance: • Keep corner radii to appropriate levels (i.e. never so wide as to induce speed). • Maximize use of curb extensions to inset parking and allow for planter boxes and other furniture to help orient and guide pedestrians. • Curb extensions also protect the corner from illegal parking, reduce crossing distances and time, and provide awareness of when a person enters and exits a street. • Use color, texture, and tactile features to help orient and guide. • Maximize entry and exit widths. Use minimum widths only when necessary because of other site constraints. • Whenever possible, provide two ramps at street corners in order to facilitate safe movement of pedestrians. Dual ramps are especially important for those in wheelchairs or who are visually impaired. As corner radii increase above 30 feet, ramp placement shifts away from the intersection, which takes pedestrians out of the sightlines of turning motorists. As such, unless curb extensions are used, corner radii of 30 feet or more may call for only a single ramp in order to allow crosswalks to be placed closer to the intersection.

EXCLUSIVE PEDESTRIAN PHASE Gives pedestrians a separate phase that allows them to cross an intersection in any direction (including diagonally) without vehicle conﬂict.

YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS BLANKOUT SIGNS These signs increase awareness of crossing pedestrians at intersections. Signs typically read “Yield to Peds” during the concurrent movement green signal phase; this message can be displayed automatically during all signal cycles or only when the pedestrian phase has been actuated. During conﬂicting movement phases, the sign can either be blank, or can read “No Turn on Red” if it is desired to prohibit this movement for the beneﬁt of pedestrians legally crossing the path of the right on red movement.

BIKE DETECTOR MARKINGS Shows bicyclist the proper positioning at an intersection to trigger a green light.

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVAL LPI Provides the pedestrian a head start (typically 3-5 seconds) before motor vehicle traﬃc is given a green light, and thereby helps to reduce pedestrian conﬂict with turning vehicles.

Due to insuﬃcient space, this design forces pedestrians with disabilities against traﬃc. Two ramps on this corner would eliminate the problem (Photo: Dan Burden).

BIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS Page 07

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan HIKEBIKE TRAILS CONCEPT PLAN INTRODUCTION

ONSTREET BICYCLE CONNECTION OPTIONS

According to the City of Corpus Christi Parks, Recreation & Open Space Master Plan (Adopted November 19, 2002; Amended June 21, 2005 and August 29, 2006), the third most desired park/recreation facility, based on citizen response, is additional trails (86% support citywide and a near 10 to 1 ratio of support to opposition). Additional off-road hike/bike trails provide an opportunity to expand recreational facilities and make regional transportation connections. Hike/bike trail alignments can make use of stormwater easements and drainage ways, abandoned and active railroad corridors (sometimes called rails-to-trails, and rails-with-trails), utility corridors, and roadside space along key streets and boulevards. Hike/bike trails support the City’s broader sustainability and livability goals by providing health, fitness, and active living opportunities in the community, improving transportation and recreation facilities, and encouraging alternative modes of travel. The City’s Parks, Recreation & Open Space Master Plan and the Corpus Christi Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) Bicycle & Pedestrian Plan identify numerous opportunities for additional hike/bike trails as well as connections between trails. The southern portion of the City, south of South Padre Island Drive (SPID) in particular, has a significant number of hike/bike trail opportunities along drainage ways, Oso Creek, and Cayo del Oso. This Hike/Bike Concept Plan builds on the previous work done by the City and MPO and focuses on potential hike/bike connectionss between three of the Destination Nodes: Sixx Points, Flour Bluff, and d Saratoga/Weber.

In locations where hike/bike trails may not be feasible or where gaps may exist, on-street connections can be provided to link the trails. The two primary on-street connection options are designated bicycle lanes and shared lane markings. Locations where these on-street connections should be considered are shown on the map on the following page. These treatments are described in more detail below.

HIKE/BIKE OPPORTUNITIES The map on the next page shows existing and potential hike/bike trails and on-street bicycle connections with a focus on connections between the Saratoga Boulevard/Weber Road and Flour Bluff Destination Nodes and between the Flour Bluff and Six Points Destination Nodes. The potential facilities shown do not represent all possibilities; rather, they are limited to locations or connections considered to have particular promise based on a preliminary analysis of maps and aerial imagery as well as field observations. Some of the key potential opportunities include:

• Connecting Six Points and Flour Bluff. The primary connections between the Six Points and Flour Bluff Nodes are via Ayers Street, Ocean Drive, and Ennis Joslin Road. The various existing trail segments along the Ocean Drive corridor should be connected into one continuous pathway. However, on-road connectivity enhancements are discussed on the Corridor Mobility Concepts: Ocean Drive sheet. An additional connection needs to be identified from the Ennis Joslin/SPID intersection to either the existing trail along Paul Jones Avenue or to the proposed trail along the west side of the Cayo del Oso. Further, restoration of the Oso Railroad trestle located on the Holly Road corridor to serve as a trail bridge should be prioritized. • Connecting Saratoga/Weber and Flour Bluff. There are numerous connection opportunities between the Saratoga/Weber and Flour Bluff Nodes, including several drainage ways and the Oso Creek Green Belt. Again, the best connection across Oso Creek or the Cayo del Oso would be the rehabilitation of the existing Oso Railroad trestle bridge. Two of the most promising drainage ways alongside which a trail might be developed to connect these two nodes are highlighted on the map on the reverse page. • Two locations were identified for potential new off-road recreational opportunities:

◦ Behind the Corpus Christi Natatorium adjacent to Cabaniss Field: the City owns the land in this area, which may provide the opportunity for facilities such as a BMX bike park and an oﬀroad trail network, complete with a trailhead, interpretive signage, and other amenities. An aerial view of this area with potential locations for recommended facilities is shown on page 3. The proposed Phase 1 trail generally follows the proposed alignment of the drainage canal trail connection between Saratoga Boulevard and Oso Creek. A footbridge would be needed to cross to the west side of the canal to provide access to additional open land on which trails could be developed in a later phase.

◦ The old (closed) Holly Road roadbed in Flour Bluﬀ: Recreational amenities and picnic facilities could be provided in Flour Bluﬀ on the eastern shore of the Cayo del Oso, at the terminus of the existing Oso railroad trestle. Key implementation steps may include re-grading the existing roadway, removing sections of deteriorating pavement, and installing interpretive signage and amenities such as picnic tables and trash cans.

BICYCLE LANES Bicycle lanes are the portion of a roadway which has been designated by striping, signing, and pavement markings for the preferential or exclusive use of bicyclists. They are most appropriate and most useful on arterial and collector streets but are generally not appropriate or necessary on local or neighborhood streets. The bike lane is located adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes and ﬂows in the same direction as motor vehicle traﬃc. Bike lanes are typically on the right side of the street, between the adjacent travel lane and curb, road edge, or parking lane. Bicycle lanes should be designed to the minimum standards contained in AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. The minimum width should be 5 feet with curb and gutter (measured from face of curb) or 4 feet without curb and gutter.

BUFFERED BICYCLE LANES Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes paired with a designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. A buffered bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered preferential lanes (section 3D01). The buffered bike lane provides additional space between the cyclist and either the motoring public or the ‘door zone’ of parked vehicles. Buffered lanes provide a greater space for bicycling without making the bike lane appear so wide that it might be mistaken for a travel lane or a parking lane. Buffering should be used adjacent to parking lanes, or on roadways with high travel speeds, high travel volumes, high amounts of truck traffic or streets with extra lanes or wide lanes.

COLORED BICYCLE LANES Colored pavement within n a bicycle lane increases thee visibility of the facility, iden-tifies potential areas of con-flict, and reinforces priorityy to bicyclists in conflict areass and in areas with pressuree for illegal parking. Colored d pavement is commonly ap-plied at intersections, drive-ways, conflict areas, and d along non-standard or enhanced facilities, such as cycle tracks. Motorists are expected to yield right of way to bicyclists at these locations. Though rarely done in North America, color can be applied along the entire length of bicycle lanes to increase the overall visibility of the facility and visually narrow the roadway for motorists.

SHARED LANE MARKINGS “SHARROWS” Shared Lane Markings, also known as “Sharrows”, are markings that are used in lanes that are shared by bicycles and motor vehicles when a travel lane is too narrow to provide a standard-width bicycle lane. The markings have been incorporated into the 2009 version of the MUTCD. They let motorists know to expect bicyclists, provide lateral positioning guidance to bicyclists, and reinforce good bicycling behavior. Sharrows should be considered on roadways too narrow for bicycles and motor vehicles to share side by side (typically less than 14-feet wide); on roadways with on-street parking; where there are gaps in a bicycle lane (such as before a bicycle lane begins or after a bicycle lane ends); for designated bicycle routes; and on roadways with a hill where there is only enough width to provide a bicycle lane in one direction (a bicycle lane should be provide d in the uphill direction, and sharrows should be provided in the downhill direction). Sharrows should only be implemented on roadways with posted speeds of 35 mph or less, and the MUTCD recommends placement of the markings after intersections and not more than every 250 feet thereafter. The 250-foot spacing is preferred on roadways with on-street parking, but greater spacing is acceptable for roadways without on-street parking (up to 500 feet).

Page 08

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan HIKEBIKE TRAILS CONCEPT PLAN

ST OM A

F !

IE L

O RE SH

UT ICA

AZAN DR

ST M

CA RIB B

RD H

MIT

AR IA D R

EA ND

R HO RE SD

BL VD GT ON

UX D RE R TT AS T

R FD

Flour Bluff Node

VIA L

AH A

BL OU

D RO SC HE RR

ST L

BL VD

WA LD RO NR CL INE D ST

PK W

LE XIN

CE LA

YO RK TO WN

NE IL

OS O

4TH

3RD

E A

IEL D RO DD F

NA V

ND R

AV ED

AVE E

YD OR R JE MA ST QUE T TL E HW R OC SK Y 358 F S I PP KS T RW Y ER T L

WA L

FR ED SF OL LY

RO DALMATIONDR DD F IE LD RD

DR IMP AL A RE ST BIS DR ON DR

LL YR

AIRLINE RD

ON BL VD

BR OO KE

SL O

CIM AR R

HA ST M PT O

CK DR BR O

AN DD

ER D

GA BL VD

BR I DG E

ISL

IDG

LE S

SE A DR N

PA DR E

OCE A

AVE D

S RD

AM D R ES

MC AR DL ER D

LA GU NA

NIL

DE LT AD R

WH IA

EC KN

CL AR E

BR O

ST AP LE SS T

AN ST

ST AP LE SS T

L M ADE DR E ITA KE R

CK SA DR LE M DR

TE GA

CIM AR SA RO LS NB AD R LV RO D C

OSO PKWY

AIRLINE RD

DO W LA NS

NA S

Off-Road Recreational Opportunity

CR 14A

0.7

Miles CR 14

CR 14

OC EA ND R

SW HO EE LL TB AN DD AY R D R HE RR JA ING MA DR IC SH AD OR R ED LA R GU

Node Boundaries

CR 43

CR 47

Potential Hike/Bike Trail Opportunity

SA RA TO

BE RL ET

CR 49

Potential On-Street Bicycle Connection (Bike Lanes or Bike Route)

HU NT DR

AA G TRL KIN

43 R 43 CR C

CR 47

18 R 18 CR C

OSO PKWY

CR 41

MT ZION DR

AM E

B E

WI LL

CA IN D EW

WY PK NN FLY

LD RD RI D

PA L

HIN DO LP

R RO

ND R PU

DR ON SH AR

CR 18

CR 18 Priority Hike/Bike Trail Opportunity

CR 53

NE RS

D PA

CR 20A

Existing Hike/Bike Trail

CR 14

TIM B ER GA S H TE R R DR QU DR O N EE NS LIP CR ES T BL VD

44 4 2444 M2 FM F

Existing Bike Lanes

CR 14

LL N KA SP ER ST

CA RR

RD YZ KO ST OR

CR 43 L

CR 47 L P

CR 49

DR IN

RP AS

PK W Y

CR 41A

ST TT

CO ML

A I SOUTH P RAIRI E RD N E SS T RAB BIT R

PA L

ST AN IR M ST

ST ER SP KA

KI N S

See Main Map

O CK

R DD ON

CO KE SN E

HI L L

ST AY ER S

DIGGER LN DIGGER LN

DR ON EV D R RD NE CO S

RD OR YZ

HWY 2

FM 763

AV E RK YO

CR 53

ST ST

37 CR

WATE RS T

CR 49A

EN W

F TANCAHUA ST

STA

6TH ST

11TH ST

15TH ST

17TH ST

T AS AR

ES NA PL

CR 53

UN DR

22 CR 22

Legend

Corpus Christi C

ME GA LD R

FM 2444

( ! F !

QU EB

L ME

OS O

Saratoga/Weber Node

N EA

NT D

H IN

PK WY

1ST

DA Y

See Inset Map

D N R

ST DO

D RI

CR 22

IN E

S DR

S LI NIS JO EN

W Y DE

TIG

WEBER RD

FM 43

TH OR

HW Y3

BL VD

F !

SE R ND R

KA YS

FM F43

MA ST ER SO ND

AD KIN

ON ST TIG TS MC ER T AR PA LN DL D RE PA E NA RD I S LA MA HE R ND DR MO TRI DR SA PO DR LI DR

IMM

A NT P TO

LI H

RA TO

E AV

I RE

GO L

DE L

ON T

N IN

IO OH

Y ST

FA N

LV D

H EL

CR 26

Six Points Node YERS ST

CR 26

26 A

LA M

AVE

LAREDO

DE ST O

S LE AP ST

665

F M ST LIPAN

HO LL YR D MO

WE BE R

HIKEBIKE OPPORTUNITIES MAP ST

1.4

2.1

RT H

Page 09

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan HIKEBIKE TRAILS CONCEPT PLAN

• Work with partners, such as the MPO, to complete a detailed SA RA TO

C !

GA BL VD

• Implement previously identified high priority action items from the Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Master Plan including:

KW Y

◦ Development of additional Bay Trail segments to connect Oso 1

Creek and Bill Witt Parks to the Bay Trail Phase III

◦ Adaptive re-use of the Oso Railroad trestle for hiking, biking,

C !

and ﬁshing, with connections in the Southside and Flour Bluﬀ.

Potential Location 2 of BMX Park

2 WO W 2

500

1,000

1,500

Feet

Legend

BR EZ INA RD

O 0

Citywide Trails Master Plan, which would include: identifying potential trail corridors, assessing the feasibility of trail construction, and identifying issues, costs, priorities, and potential funding sources.

CABANISS

SP CA BA NIS

The next steps to implementing additional hike/bike trails in the City are:

Potential Location 1 of BMX Park

IMPLEMENTATION

Corpus Christi Natatorium

RA NG ER

AY E

AV E

RS S

CABANISS FIELD RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES MAP

WO W

RD SA TU RN RD AP OL LO RD BR AT TO NR D

• Partner with other agencies and organizations to identify funding opportunities and expand the trails network and identifying funding opportunities. Potential partners include: the MPO; Community Redevelopment Areas/Agencies (CRA’s); School Board; Department of Education; Colleges and Universities; Community Traffic Safety Team (CTST); Bicycle and Walking Advocacy Organizations; Trails Organizations; Parks, Recreation, and Waterfront Organizations; Public Health Departments, Organizations, and Task Forces; Chambers of Commerce; Transit Agencies; Utilities Companies and Systems; Railroads; Port Authority; Department of Environmental Protection; and Branches of the U.S. Military.

• Aggressively pursue funding opportunities which may include Transportation Enhancement funds; Recreational Trails Program funds; Transportation, Community, and System Preservation Program (TCSP); Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ); Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) Grants; Bonds; Active Living/Transportation grants; private donations or sponsorships; and City general funds.

Potential Location of BMX Park Phase 1 Phase 2

C !

Trailhead / Signage Potential Bridge

WEB ER RD

Page 10

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan ROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WHAT IS A MODERN ROUNDABOUT?

ROUNDABOUT ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES ADVANTAGES

A modern roundabout is a circular intersection with design features that promote safe and efficient traffic flow. Vehicles travel counterclockwise around a raised center island; entering traffic yields the right-of-way to circulating traffic. Slow speeds are maintained by the deflection of traffic around the center island and the relatively tight radius of the roundabout and exit lanes. Drivers approaching a roundabout must reduce their speeds, look for potential conflicts with vehicles already in the circle, and be prepared to stop for pedestrians and bicyclists. Roundabouts help to meet the sustainability goals for Corpus Christi by improving the efficiency of traffic flow by slowing vehicles but keeping them moving, thereby reducing vehicle delays, fuel consumption, and air and noise pollution while creating a safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists.

DISADVANTAGES

NONMOTORIZED USERS • Pedestrians with vision impairments may have trouble finding crosswalks and de• Pedestrians must consider only one direction of conflicting traffic at a time. • Bicyclists have options for negotiating roundabouts, depending on their skill and termining when/if vehicles have yielded at crosswalks. comfort level. • Bicycle ramps at roundabouts have the potential to be confused with pedestrian ramps.

SAFETY • Reduce crash severity for all users, allow safer merges into circulating traffic, and • Increase in single-vehicle and fixed-object crashes compared to other intersection •

provide more time for all users to detect and correct for their mistakes or the mistakes of others due to lower vehicle speeds. Fewer overall conflict points and no left-turn conflicts.

treatments.

• Multilane roundabouts present more difficulties for individuals with blindness or low vision due to challenges in detecting gaps and determining that vehicles have yielded at crosswalks.

OPERATIONS • Equal priority for all approaches can reduce the progression for high volume ap• May have lower delays and queues than other forms of intersection control. • Can reduce lane requirements between intersections, including bridges between proaches. ramp terminals. • Cannot provide explicit priority to specific users (e.g. trains, emergency vehicles, • Creates possibility for adjacent signals to operate with more efficient cycle lengths transit, pedestrians) unless supplemental traffic control devices are provided.

Features of a modern roundabout.

where the roundabout replaces a signal that is setting the controlling cycle length.

ACCESS MANAGEMENT • May reduce the number of available gaps for midblock unsignalized intersections • Facilitate U-turns that can substitute for more difficult midblock left turns. and driveways.

• Noise, air quality impacts, and fuel consumption may be reduced. • Little stopping during off-peak periods. A roundabout can safely accommodate bicyclists (left), buses (center), and have only 8 vehicle conﬂict points compared to conventional intersections, which have 32 (right), many of which are at high speeds and high impact angles.

ROUNDABOUT BENEFITS Lives saved

• • • •

Up to a 90% reduction in fatalities 76% reduction in injury crashes 30-40% reduction in pedestrian crashes 75% fewer conflict points than four-way intersections

Slower vehicle speeds (under 30 mph)

• • • •

Allows drivers more time to judge and react to other cars or pedestrians Accommodates older and novice drivers Reduces the severity of crashes Creates safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists

Efficient traffic flow

• 30-50% increase in traffic capacity • Improved traffic flow for intersections that handle a high number of left turns • Reduced need for storage lanes

Money saved

• No signal equipment to install and repair equates to an estimated average savings of $5,000 per year in electricity and maintenance costs • Service life of a roundabout is 25 years (vs. the 10-year service life of signal equipment) Community beneﬁts

• • • • •

Calms traffic Safer pedestrian environment Reduces fuel consumption as well as air and noise pollution Creates a safer pedestrian environment Establishes a landmark identity and enhances sense of place

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS • Possible impacts to natural and cultural resources due to greater spatial requirements at intersections.

TRAFFIC CALMING • More expensive than other traffic calming treatments.

• Reduced vehicular speeds. • Beneficial in transition areas by reinforcing the notion of a significant change in the driving environment.

SPACE • Often requires less queue storage space on intersection approaches and thus can • Often requires more space at the intersection itself than other intersection treatallow for closer intersection and access spacing.

ments.

• Reduces the need for additional right-of-way between links of intersection. • More feasibility to accommodate parking, wider sidewalks, planter strips, wider outside lanes, and/or bicycle lanes on the approaches.

OPERATION & MAINTENANCE • May require landscape maintenance. • No signal hardware or equipment maintenance. AESTHETICS • May create a safety hazard if hard objects are placed in the central island directly • Provide attractive entries, centerpieces, or landmarks in communities. • Used in tourist or shopping areas to separate commercial uses from residential areas. facing the entries. • Provide opportunity for landscaping and/or gateway feature to enhance the community.

Page 11

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan ROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATION OF A ROUNDABOUT Roundabout should be considered under a wide range of conditions but may be particularly advantageous for:

• • • • • • • • • • •

Intersections with a high crash rate or a higher severity of crashes Replacement of all-way stops Replacement of signalized intersections, especially where unbalanced movements cause inefficiency Replacement of two-way stops when side street delay becomes excessive Intersections with complex geometry, skew angles, or more than four approaches Rural intersections with high-speed approaches Freeway interchange ramp terminals Intersections with high volume of U-turn movements Closely spaced intersections with widening constraints Transitions or “gateways” from high speed to lower speed areas Locations where aesthetics are important

To implement a roundabout at the Morgan/Baldwin intersection, the following steps should be followed:

1. Complete a roundabout feasibility study (see list of potential elements on next page). 2. Look for opportunities to piggyback onto other projects, such as resurfacing of the corridors. Resurfacing projects present an ideal time to restripe to implement a road diet along the corridor, which is recommended for both the Morgan Avenue and Baldwin Boulevard corridors to facilitate the use of a single lane roundabout. 3. Identify potential funding sources, which could include Transportation Enhancement funds, safety funds such as Hazard Elimination Program (HEP), and Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. 4. Implement a policy to evaluate roundabouts at intersections for all new construction, reconstruction, or when capacity improvements are being considered. For example, the New York State Department of Transportation has a policy that roundabouts must be considered in such situations, and if feasible, should be the Department’s preferred alternative due to the proven substantial safety and operational beneﬁts.

PRIMARY DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

AVE N GAN

tended lanes. • Provide adequate accommodation for the design vehicles. Truck aprons are often used to accommodate the turning needs of larger vehicles while maintaining a narrower circulating roadway and providing adequate deflection for passenger vehicles. • Design to meet the needs of pedestrians and cyclists. • Provide appropriate sight distance and visibility for driver recognition of the intersection and conflicting users.

MOR

balance, and lane continuity.

• Provide smooth channelization that is intuitive to drivers and results in vehicles naturally using the in-

• Provide slow entry speeds and consistent speeds through the roundabout by using deflection. • Provide the appropriate number of lanes and lane assignment to achieve adequate capacity, lane volume

W D L A

LV B N

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STEPS The intersection of Morgan Avenue and Baldwin Boulevard in Corpus Christi has been identified as a potential candidate location for a single lane roundabout in conjunction with the concept planning completed for this Destination Node. A roundabout would replace the existing traffic signal and could be implemented in conjunction with road diet projects on both Morgan Avenue and Baldwin Boulevard (converting those roadways to have one through lane in each direction, a two-way center left turn lane, and bicycle lanes). The goal of these projects would be to make the corridors friendlier to all modes of travel, particularly non-motorized modes. The roundabout would help to improve traffic flow and safety at the intersection while making crossing the intersection easier and safer for pedestrians and bicyclists.

In a project similar to that proposed for the Morgan-Baldwin intersection, the intersection of College Street and Oak Street in Asheville, NC was converted from a signalized intersection (top left) to a single lane roundabout (top right). (Bottom) View of the College Street roundabout in Asheville, NC from the other direction. Concept for a single lane roundabout at the intersection of Morgan Avenue and Baldwin Boulevard.

ROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Page 12

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan ROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ROUNDABOUT FEASIBILITY

EXAMPLE PHOTOS

A detailed roundabout feasibility study may include the following elements:

• Identify reasons for considering a roundabout as an improvement alternative at this intersection. • Identify the existing traffic operations and safety conditions at the intersection for comparison with expected roundabout performance. Give detailed performance comparisons (including delay, capacity, emissions, and/or interaction effects with nearby intersections) of the roundabout with alternative control modes for existing and future conditions. • Identify a conceptual roundabout configuration, which includes the number of lanes on each approach and the designation of those lanes. • Demonstrate whether an appropriately sized and configured roundabout can be implemented. Observations may include:

◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦

Physical and right-of-way features

◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦

Physical or geometric features that could make the construction or operation of a roundabout more diﬃcult.

Current and planned site development features such as adjoining businesses, driveways, etc. Community considerations such as a need for parking, landscaping character, etc. Traﬃc management strategies that are being (or will be used) in the area. Existing and projected public transit usage (routes, stops, etc.). Intersection treatments at adjacent intersections.

History of public complaints that suggest a need for traﬃc calming.

Number of other roundabouts in the jurisdiction that would make drivers more familiar with this type of control. Identify all potential complicating factors, assess their relevance to the location, and identify any mitigation efforts that might be required. Potential complicating factors may include: Land use or traffic generators that could interfere with construction or cause operational problems. Other traffic control devices along any intersecting roadway which would require preemption. Bottlenecks on any of the intersecting roadways that could back up traffic into the roundabout. Sight distance obstructions. Platooned arterial traffic flow on one or more approaches.

Heavy use by persons with special needs that could suggest a requirement for more positive control. Recent safety projects in the area to beneﬁt older drivers. Emergency vehicle operations coordination requirements. Emergency evacuation route coordination requirements. Other problems that have been identiﬁed.

• Demonstrate institutional and community support, indicating that key institutions (e.g., police, fire department, and schools) and key community leaders have been consulted. • Include an economic analysis indicating that a roundabout compares favorably with alternative control modes from a benefit-cost perspective.

Example single lane modern roundabouts in Clearwater, FL (1), Gainesville, FL (2), Bradenton Beach, FL (3), Ontario, Canada (4), Paola, KS (5), and San Diego, CA (6).

Page 13

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN INTRODUCTION

CRITERIA FOR ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION

A “road diet” describes a project to “skinny up” a street when it has an unnecessary number of through lanes. The removal of unneeded travel lanes from a roadway provides space that can then be used for other uses and travel modes. The most common road diet projects involve converting a four-lane undivided roadway to a two-lane roadway (one travel lane in each direction plus a two-way center left turn lane) by removing one travel lane in each direction. The remaining space is most commonly used to add bicycle lanes, but it can also be used for on-street parking, landscaping, or sidewalks. A center landscaped median or refuge islands can be used in place of the center two-way left turn lane in locations where driveways are uncommon or absent. Road diets help to meet the sustainability goals for Corpus Christi by fostering non-motorized travel modes through reduced vehicle speeds and safer conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians and reducing total impervious cover and the associated deleterious environmental impacts. Because only under-utilized travel lanes are removed, motor vehicle traﬃc typically moves along a road dieted corridor with similar eﬃciency and travel time. The cost of a road diet project can be minimized by simply re-striping a roadway during its normal maintenance cycle. No right-of-way acquisition is required for most projects.

ROAD DIET BENEFITS

Three-lane roadway sections with average daily traﬃc (ADT) volumes below 20,000 vehicles per day can generally be considered feasible for roadways, although moderate ADT volumes of 8,000 – 15,000 are preferred, particularly for a ﬁrst road diet within a community. Other factors and characteristics that may support road diet implementation include:

• Evidence that the existing four-lane undivided roadway cross section may be functioning as a “defacto” three-lane roadway (most of the through flow is in the outside • • • • • • • •

lane and the inside lane is used primarily for left turning traffic). High crash rates or high numbers of rear-end, sideswipe, and/or angle crashes related to left turn and crossing vehicles. Transit corridors. Popular or essential bicycle routes/links. General interest in balancing the needs of the transportation system with the interests of the surrounding community and the environment. General interest in creating a transportation facility that is an asset to the community. Commercial reinvestment areas or economic enterprise zones. Historic streets or scenic roads. Entertainment districts or main streets.

• Lower vehicle speed variability (i.e., more calm and less aggressive traffic flow) due to the inability to change lanes or

CANDIDATE ROAD DIET PROJECTS IN CORPUS CHRISTI

pass along a three-lane roadway compared to a four-lane undivided roadway.

• Improved mobility and access, particularly for non-motorized modes: ◦ A three-lane cross section produces fewer conflict points between vehicles and crossing pedestrians. ◦ Pedestrians cross one direction and one lane of traffic at a time using median refuge islands, which can be provided in

many places.

◦ A conversion from four to three lanes may allow the creation of designated bike lanes. • Reduced number of collisions and injuries, which generally results from: ◦ A reduction in speed variability along the corridor. ◦ A decrease in the number of conflict points between vehicles. ◦ Improved sight distance for the major street left turn vehicles. • Improved livability and quality of life. • The cost of a road diet project can be minimized by simply re-striping a roadway during its normal maintenance cycle.

10 3

Rozzelles Ferry Rd in Charlotte, NC following a Road diet

No right-of-way acquisition is required for most projects.

• There are generally no significant changes to traffic volumes on the road dieted streets, which means that they do not result in a significant amount of diversion to other streets.

• Road dieted streets generally continue to operate adequately without significant queuing and operational impacts. A road diet was completed on Edgewater Drive in Orlando, FL to convert it from four lanes (left photo) to three lanes with bike lanes (right photo). The project helped spawn a new mixed-use project (multistory building shown in right photo), and has resulted in documented increases in pedestrian and bicycle use (23 and 30 percent, respectively). Crash and injury rates along the corridor decreased by 34 and 68 percent, respectively, even though traffic volumes only declined slightly from their pre-project level of aproximately 20,000 vehicles per day. Travel times on the corridor were only minimally affected, with an increase of 50 seconds in the AM peak hour over 1.5 miles, and only 10 seconds in the PM peak hour. The project was viewed as a success by both area residents and business owners, who, when surveyed following its completion, gave positive feedback for 8 of 9 identified measures of effectiveness as to whether the project achieved its objectives.

7 1 - Leopard St (N Port Ave - N Upper Broadway) 2 - Brownlee Blvd (Laredo St to Staples St) 3 - Baldwin Blvd (Airport Rd to S Port Ave)

4 - Morgan Ave (Airport Rd to S Port Ave) 5 - Ayers St (Ocean Dr to S Port Ave) 6 - Santa Fe St (Ayers St to Robert Dr) 7 - Gollihar Rd (Greenwood Dr to S Staples St) 8 - McArdle Rd (Ayers St to Ennis Joslin Rd) 9 - Violet Rd (I-37 to South of Starlite Ln) 10- McKinzie Rd (I-37 to South of Haven Dr)

Application of the road diet criteria to roadways in the City of Corpus Christi yielded 10 preliminary candidates for road diet implementation projects, as shown in the above graphic.

Page 14

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AYERS ST  N. OF BALDWIN BLVD EXISTING

AYERS ST  S. OF BALDWIN BLVD EXISTING

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS The Ayers Street corridor between Ocean Drive and Port Avenue is a strong candidate roadway for a road diet project. This following highlights the characteristics of two diﬀerent sections and illustrates the opportunities available. North Section (Ocean Drive to Baldwin Boulevard): • Existing roadway section is a four-lane undivided roadway, 40 feet from curb to curb. • 2010 ADT < 10,000 (strong road diet candidate). • Provides a direct connection to the “Six Points” area and its existing RTA Six Points Station, as well as the Christus Spohn Hospital – Shoreline. • Potential roadway section is three lanes (one travel lane in each direction plus two-way center left turn lane) and bike lanes, 40 feet from curb to curb. South Section (Baldwin Boulevard to Port Avenue): • Existing roadway section is a five-lane section, including a two-way center left turn lane and a 60-foot curb to curb width. • 2010 ADT = 16,500 (well within the traffic limits of a road diet, which is typically < 20,000). • Provides connections to Del Mar College East Campus, Heb Park, Broadmoor Park, and the RTA Port-Ayers Station. • Potential roadway sections:

◦ Alternative 1: two-lane divided roadway with raised median (and left turn lanes as appropriate) and buffered bike lanes, 60 feet from curb to curb.

◦ Alternative 2: two-lane divided roadway with raised median (and left turn lanes as appropriate), buffered bike lanes, and on-street parking on one side of the street.

◦ * Alternative 2 could also be modified to include parking on both sides of the street, if desired (to correspond to proposed mixed-use or commercial development) but would require existing curbs to be relocated, possibly through the use of inset parking with redevelopment.

AYERS ST  N. OF BALDWIN BLVD PROPOSED

AYERS ST  S. OF BALDWIN BLVD PROPOSED  ALT. 1

AYERS ST  S. OF BALDWIN BLVD PROPOSED  ALT. 2

Page 15

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STEPS, CONT. To implement a road diet, the following steps should be followed: 1. Complete a road diet feasibility study (see list of potential elements). Feasibility studies should be completed for any proposed road diet; facilities with existing traffic volumes greater than 15,000 vehicles per day require more detailed study. 2. Look for opportunities to piggyback on other projects. Road diets are most effectively implemented when a roadway is being resurfaced or reconstructed. 3. Identify potential funding sources, which could include Transportation Enhancement funds, safety funds such as Hazard Elimination Program (HEP), and Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. 4. Following completion of a road diet project, it is important to document the results of the project by completing a followup study to document actual traffic volumes, travel times, speeds, pedestrian and bicycle activity, crashes, and public satisfaction. An “after” study may help to provide justification for future road diet projects.

ROAD DIET FEASIBILITY STUDY A detailed road diet feasibility study may include the following elements: • Roadway Characteristics and Context

◦ Existing lane configuration and intersection geometry ◦ Roadway function and environment (the existing and intended function of the candidate roadway in terms of mobility and access, including number of midblock driveways)

◦ Primary adjacent land uses and destinations ◦ Likelihood of frequently stopping and/or slow-moving vehicles (agriculture, buses, mail), including transit routes and stops

◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦

Crash types and patterns (typically, a five-year crash history is desirable) Existing pedestrian and bicycle volumes Presence of parallel routes Existing property values along study corridor Resident/business “before” survey Other contextual considerations

• Corridor Concepts/Typical Section Alternatives • Traﬃc Operations ◦ Peak hour intersection turning volumes and patterns ◦ Traffic volumes along study corridor and parallel streets ◦ Existing corridor speeds (average, 85th percentile) ◦ Existing corridor travel times ◦ Existing on-street parking utilization (if applicable) ◦ Analysis of existing and future traffic volumes conditions ◦ Intersection level of service (LOS), delay, and queues ◦ Arterial travel time, average speed, and LOS ◦ Future conditions should typically be evaluated based on projected traffic volumes for a 20-year horizon

East Blvd in Charlotte, NC following a Road diet.

◦ In some cases, a traffic simulation of the corridor may be necessary • Implementation Steps ◦ Recommended typical section concept ◦ Traffic control and access management changes needed to support proposed project ◦ Right-of-way availability, costs, and acquisition impacts ◦ Construction cost estimate ◦ Coordination opportunities, such as pavement reconstruction or overlay project, or jurisdictional roadway transfer

◦ Funding opportunities and/or strategies Baxter Street in Athens, GA was converted from a four-lane undivided roadway (top) to a threelane roadway with shared bicycle areas (bottom). Traﬃc volumes along the corridor were largely unchanged (a decrease from approximately 19,000 ADT of only 3.7 percent), but crash frequency decreased by over 53 percent compared to the before condition.

ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Page 16

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Leopard Street / Annaville AERIAL

ISSUES

EXISTING CONDITIONS

TE RLI S TA

VIO

LET

Leopard Street in the Annaville area is a four-lane suburban roadway with four travel lanes, inside curb and median, and outside ﬂush shoulders with open drainage. Existing development in this corridor is mostly commercial with a small amount of multi-family residential. The corridor has a large number of driveways; many business have multiple driveways or access points or undeﬁned driveways wherein nearly the entire frontage of the business functions as a driveway. There are many median breaks, some of which have deceleration lanes. The intersections of Violet Road, Starlite Lane and McKinzie Road are signalized. Sidewalks are intermittent and random. Pedestrian crossing features are also intermittent and poorly placed from a safety and design perspective. Although there are existing paved shoulders, they are not designated as bicycle lanes. Existing corridor characteristics include:

LEO

PA R

D ST

MC K I N Z IE RD

• • • • • • • •

Four 12’ travel lanes with a 30’ landscaped median, with median breaks and turn lanes Variable shoulder width (up to 11’) Approximately 100’ of roadway, curb to curb Intermittent but few sidewalks along south side of roadway 14,000 average trips per day (2009) 45 MPH posted speed limit Numerous commercial/business driveways on both sides of the corridor Signalized intersections at major cross streets

Leopard Street functions as a suburban arterial in the Annaville area. The corridor is entirely automobile-oriented with few multi-modal features. The volume and density of driveways and access points create a situation where the roadway functions conflict, serving as both a regional through roadway and providing access to adjacent property. The current driveway and median configurations also present safety issues - particularly for pedestrians and bicyclists - by increasing potential conflict points for drivers and inducing variability in driver behavior. As traffic volumes increase, and additional development and redevelopment occurs in this corridor, these issues will create increasing amounts of congestion, delays, and crashes within the area and corridor. In planning the future configuration of this corridor, steps must be taken to ensure that its design supports the desired form and vision of the greater Annaville Destination Node.

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS RECOMMENDATIONS Leopard Street is entirely automobile-oriented within the Annaville Destination Node. The realignment of this section of the corridor to include on-street parking and bicycle and pedestrian features would foster pedestrian-oriented development within this Node. Two alternatives are presented below; implementation decisions should be based on the adjacent land uses and available right of way. • Alternative 1 involves re-visioning this corridor with a more coherent urban form and a more defined urban edge created by locating buildings closer to the street. The recommended roadway section would be two, 11-foot travel lanes in each direction, and a 22-foot median with controlled directional, or full, openings at appropriate locations. The roadway would also have a 5-foot bicycle lane, with a 3-foot striped buffer between the bicycle lane and an 8-foot, on-street, parallel parking area. Sidewalks with tree wells for landscaping and street furniture would extend from the parking to the building frontage. Sidewalks in this area would be a minimum of 6 feet, but would ideally be 8 to 15 feet wide. The curb to curb distance for this alternative is 98 feet, excluding sidewalks. This alternative should generally be accommodated in the existing 100 feet from edge of pavement to edge of pavement. This alternative does include inside and outside curbs, and would require a closed drainage system (curb and gutter). • Alternative 2 was developed to accommodate areas where less right-of-way is available and the curb to curb width of the roadway needs to be reduced. This alternative also includes four 11-foot travel lanes and the 5-foot bicycle lane, but reduces the median width to 8 feet and eliminates the buffer and the on street parallel parking reducing the curb to curb width to 62 feet. As in Alternative 1, this alternative would require curb and gutter. Sidewalks with tree planters would extend from the curb to the building frontage. • Consideration and incorporation of mid-block crossings to provide safer pedestrian access across Leopard Street should also be included under both alternatives.

1. Incorporate the vision for the Leopard Street corridor in planning for the Annaville Destination Node, including the creation of any land use or zoning overlays associated with this destination node. Consider the following design elements: a. Assessing the need for on-street parking b. Limiting or eliminating driveway access to the street c. Implementing landscaping and intersection treatment design guidelines d. Establishing driveway design guidelines e. Making provisions for future transit development f. Requiring bicycle parking and providing associated design guidelines 2. Conduct a project development/feasibility study for Leopard Street that incorporates the desired roadway type(s) and includes the following scope elements: a. Identification of preferred alternative b. Coordination with the MPO and area stakeholders c. Creation of design guidelines for landscaping, signage and roadway markings

e. Identification of crosswalk locations and types f. Identification of median openings and types 3. Coordinate with MPO and TxDOT as appropriate to begin programming for recommended modifications through various potential funding programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds, general roadway funds, and local funds. 4. Prioritize the recommended reconfiguration of the Leopard Street corridor in the Annaville Destination Node through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility, if applicable. 5. Design and construct improvements opportunistically as funding becomes available, or in coordination with standard resurfacing projects. 6. In the interim, for additional development or redevelopment in this project area, consider limiting driveway access and driveway widths, requiring cross-access easements, and eliminating or retrofitting existing driveways to enhance safety for all users. Incorporation or completion of the currently intermittent sidewalk should be prioritized as funding becomes available or as a required part of future development projects along the corridor.

d. Creation of design guidelines for incorporating transit stops or pull-out bays

Page 17

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Leopard Street / Annaville EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION

The existing Leopard Street corridor in the Annaville area has a suburban typical section with four 12-foot travel lanes, variable width paved shoulders (up to 11 feet) and a 30-foot wide landscaped median with median breaks and turn lanes.

ALTERNATIVE 1

ALTERNATIVE 2

Alternative 1 would reconﬁgure Leopard Street using an urban typical section with narrower 11-foot travel lanes, a narrower 22-foot raised and landscaped median, on-street parking, and buﬀered bicycle lanes.

Alternative 2 is a variation of the urban typical section presented in Alternative 1, but would apply in locations with constrained right-of-way where a narrower curb-to-curb width is needed. This section narrows the median to 8 feet (between intersections) and eliminates the on-street parking and bicycle lane buﬀering.

EXISTING PHOTO

EXAMPLE PHOTOS

(1) Four-lane divided roadway with on-street parking in Boulder, CO. (2) Four-lane divided roadway with narrow median and bike lanes in University Place, WA. (3) Four-lane divided roadway with bike lanes and signalized midblock pedestrian crosswalk in Lake Worth, FL. (4) Sidewalk along four-lane divided roadway with on-street parking in Del Mar, CA. (5) Example graphic showing bicycle lane with buﬀered area to adjacent on-street parking.

The existing Leopard Street corridor between Violet Road and McKinzie Road.

LEOPARD STREET / ANNAVILLE Page 18

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Lipes Boulevard AERIAL AR P

ASS

Lipes Boulevard is a two lane neighborhood collector with on-street parking between Cimarron Boulevard and Yorktown Boulevard. Existing development is largely single family residential in this corridor. Most homes face the neighborhood streets intersecting Lipes Boulevard; there are few existing driveways or access points on Lipes Boulevard itself. Higher density multifamily residential and some non-residential development exists at major intersections. There are currently plans to extend Lipes Boulevard from Cimarron Boulevard to Airline Road. Lipes Boulevard also provides access to Kaﬃe Middle School and Jones Elementary School, as well as to Crossgate and Brockhampton Parks. Existing conditions along the Lipes Boulevard corridor include:

SUNWOO D DR

CROSSGATE PARK

S TA

PLE

S ST

CED

BROCKHAMPTON PARK

FF IE SC MID HO D OL LE

ARR

NNE

D LI

PES

B LV

D EX

TEN

SIO

N

ROD

D FL

PLA

•

B LV

EUD

AIRLINE RD

KTO

S BL

CIM

YOR

LIPE

ON B

LV D

JONES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

ISSUES

EXISTING CONDITIONS

• • • • • • • • • •

Two travel lanes with on-street parking (unmarked) allowed along both sides of the road Approximately 46’ of pavement, curb to curb 5’ sidewalks along both sides of roadway Approximately 68’ feet from back of sidewalk to the back of sidewalk No bicycle lanes/trails 30 MPH posted speed limit Direct access to Kaffie Middle School and Jones Elementary School Access to Crossgate Park and Brockhampton Park Few driveways along Lipes Boulevard Signalized intersections with major arterial and collectors Planned extension of Lipes Boulevard from Cimarron Boulevard to Airline Road

For the majority of the Lipes Boulevard corridor, the single family residential development is accessed via side streets and does not front on the Lipes corridor itself. Overall, Lipes Boulevard is a low volume, slow speed neighborhood or local collector with wide lanes and on-street parking. Since the residential units do not generally front on Lipes Boulevard, there is a potential opportunity to provide bicycle lanes in place of the existing on-street parking, which is likely underutilized except for areas around Kaffie Middle School and Jones Elementary School. Using lower volume, slower speed collector roads to provide bicycle facilities is a good way to provide safer multi-modal access to cyclists of varying degrees of experience and confidence. Most cities do not have specific written policies that address whether parking is allowed within designated on-street bicycle lanes, however, in order to address the potential conflict between on-street parking and the proposed bicycle lanes in this area and in other similar situations, the creation of such a policy should be considered. There are several options for addressing this bicycle/parking conflict, including:

• • • • •

Modifying the on-street parking Removing the parking on one or both sides Time-restricted parking Restriping to provide both parking and bicycle lanes Removal of bicycle lanes in the section where on-street parking is necessary (sharrow markings could be used in these areas).

The appropriate solution depends on many factors and should be determined on a case by case basis with input from facility users and stakeholders. In the case of Lipes Boulevard, and other similar corridors in the city, the partial or complete removal of on-street parking, in combination with other strategies such as sharrows, could provide lower-cost opportunities for enhanced bicycle access with only limited impact to existing arterial traﬃc routes.

RECOMMENDATIONS The current configuration of the residential development along the Lipes Boulevard corridor offers an opportunity to incorporate bicycle lanes within the existing pavement limits. The addition of bicycle lanes on Lipes Boulevard may also provide additional opportunities for bicycle access to Kaffie Middle School and Jones Elementary School, thereby promoting “Safe Routes to School.” Using other local streets, a bicycle route could be developed from the Airline Road/Lipes Boulevard nexus to the Weber Road/Saratoga Boulevard Destination Node as a pilot project. Several potential routes exist, including: Lipes Boulevard to Sunwood Drive to Cedar Pass Drive to Grand Junction Drive to Aaron Drive to Acushnet Drive, which would fall within the Weber Road/Saratoga Boulevard Node. Recommendations for this corridor include:

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS 1. Conduct a project development/feasibility study for a pilot bicycle route project along the Lipes Boulevard corridor that includes: a. Developing guidelines and procedures for establishing criteria for on-street parking modifications related to new/existing bicycle lanes. The guidelines should also outline procedures in the selection of streets for new bicycle lanes. Implement the guidelines along corridors with bicycle lane/on-street parking conflicts on a caseby-case basis b. Coordinating with area stakeholders and bicyclists

•

Designating buffered bicycle lanes and landscaping on the Lipes Boulevard Corridor ◦ ◦

Recommended Alternative #1 includes complete removal of on-street parking and replacing with buffered bicycle lanes.

Recommended Alternative #2 includes retaining the on street parking on one side, which may be appropriate near areas such as Kaffie Middle School and Jones Elementary School. Bicycle lanes are provided, with the bicycle lane buffered on the side providing on-street parking. Curb bulbouts into the parking lane are recommended at street corners to narrow the cross section of the street. • Designating addition of bicycle lanes or shared lane markings (“sharrows”) on connecting corridors to provide bicycle access via neighborhood collectors to various destinations. • Incorporating bicycle facilities into the planned Lipes Boulevard Extension, as well as into any potential future development along this corridor or within the Airline Road, Rodd Field Road, or Yorktown Boulevard corridors.

c. Coordinating with the MPO and any relevant bicycle/pedestrian committees d. Designing guidelines for landscaping and driveway placement e. Identifying other future routes and connections to area destinations, parks, and transit stops 2. Coordinate with MPO to begin programming for needed, identified modifications through various potential funding programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds, general roadway funds, and local funds. 3. Prioritize implementation of the proposed steps through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility, if applicable. 4. Design and construct improvements as funding becomes available or in coordination with standard resurfacing projects

Page 19

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Lipes Boulevard EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION

The existing Lipes Boulevard corridor has an urban typical section with two travel lanes and unmarked parallel parking along both sides of the road. A total of 46 feet of pavement is provided between the curbs.

ALTERNATIVE 1

ALTERNATIVE 2

Alternative 1 would eliminate on-street parking and reconﬁgure the space with buﬀered bicycle lanes.

EXISTING SECTION PHOTO

Alternative 2 would eliminate on-street parking on one side of the street, and include bicycle lanes. The bicycle lane adjacent to on-street parking would include a striped buﬀer.

EXAMPLE PHOTOS

(1) Example two-lane residential collector street with bike lanes and on-street parking on one side adjacent to a school, Cornelius, NC. (2) Example two-lane residential collector street with bike lanes and on-street parking on one side, Port Townsend, WA. (3) Two-lane roadway with buffered bike lanes and on-street parking on one side, Seattle, WA. (4) Buffered bike lane in Gainesville, FL. (5) Example graphic showing bicycle lane with buffered area to adjacent onstreet parking. (6) Shared lane marking (“sharrow”) adjacent to on-street parking, Tallahassee, FL. Li Boulevard, Lipes B l d shown h here h to the h east off Staples S l Street, S features f wide id llanes that h allow ll ffor on-street parking on both sides of the street. This parking is seldom used except for the areas immediately adjacent to Kaffie Middle School and Jones Elementary School.

LIPES BOULEVARD Page 20

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Ocean Drive AERIAL COLE PARK

LOUISIANA PKWY OCE AN D R ALTA PLAZA ST

RECOMMENDATIONS

Ocean Drive between Louisiana Parkway and Ennis Joslin Road is a four-lane urban arterial with a landscaped median, bicycle lanes, sidewalk on the south side and intermittent sidewalk on the north side. The Ocean Drive/Shoreline Drive corridor runs along the Corpus Christi Bay through the City of Corpus Christi. Existing development is largely single family residential between Airline Road and Ennis Joslin Road, with some commercial development at the Ennis Joslin intersection; there are also several parks located on the north side of the roadway. Heading downtown along Ocean Drive, the intensity and density of existing development increases between Ennis Joslin and Louisiana Parkway, with more multi-family residential and hotel uses, particularly between Airline Road and Doddridge Road. There are 5 parks on the north side of Ocean Drive within this section of the corridor. Existing corridor characteristics include:

Ocean Drive has bicycle and pedestrian features, but the existing roadway volumes and speeds, as currently designed, creates potential safety issues for bicyclists. The recommendations for this corridor focus on making these facilities safer and more appealing for bicyclists and pedestrians and include two alternatives:

• • • • • • • • • •

Corpus Christi Bay ROPES PARK

DODDRI

EXISTING CONDITIONS

DGE RD

Four 12’ travel lanes with a 10’ landscaped median and 7’ bike lanes along both sides Approximately 67’ of roadway, curb to curb 5’ sidewalk along south side of roadway 12,200 to 18,400 average trips per day (2010) 45 MPH posted speed limit, Ennis Joslin Road to Robert Drive 40 MPH posted speed Robert Drive to Louisiana Parkway Provides direct access to 5 parks along Corpus Christi Bay Many residential driveways on both the north and south sides of the corridor Intersections with major arterials and collectors are signalized Connection from Texas A&M University Corpus Christi to Downtown via Shoreline Drive

DODDRIDGE PARK

ISSUES R

TD BER

OCE

DR SWATNER PARK

AIRLIN

E RD

PALMETTO PARK

TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY CORPUS CHRISTI

ENN

IS J

R LIN

Ocean Drive functions as an urban boulevard, with scenic vistas of Corpus Christi Bay and access to several bayside parks. Land use is largely single family residential. The posted speed of 40 to 45 MPH is high for a residential area, and the wide lanes and wide bicycle lanes visually encourage higher speeds. The number of driveways, the high speeds, the lack of a demarcated buffer between the traffic and bike lanes, and the intermittent use of the bike lanes for on-street parking make this corridor challenging for even the most experienced cyclists. The only continuous sidewalk is on the south side of the roadway, thus creating the need for pedestrian crossings to destinations on the north side, such as the parks. Additionally the sidewalk is immediately adjacent to the roadway, and while the bicycle lanes do provide some buffer, the high speed of the roadway generally makes walking adjacent to the roadway somewhat uncomfortable for pedestrians. Bicycle lane markings are present but are widely spaced at about ¼ mile. Visually, the wide bicycle lane looks like a shoulder or parking area to motorists unfamiliar with the area or with the bicycle lane markings.

• Alternative 1: Restripe the existing corridor to include the addition of buffered bicycle lanes. This alternative generally only involves restriping the existing pavement. By narrowing the existing lanes to 11 feet, a 3-foot buffer of diagonal striping can be added on both sides of the roadway, leaving a 6-foot bicycle lane. This striped barrier will provide more distance between cyclists and motorists, and will also potentially calm traffic by visually narrowing the road. The striped buffer will also help to discourage those that may perceive the bicycle lane as a parking area. There are also several intersections at which the southbound bicycle lane is not continuous through the intersection, including Alta Plaza Street, Doddridge Street, Robert Drive, Airline Drive, and Ennis Joslin Road. Each of these intersections should be reconfigured to provide a continuous bicycle lane for southbound bicycle traffic through the intersections. Alternative 1 represents a lower cost solution that might be implemented in the immediate near term, or alternatively at the time of the next pavement overlay project on Ocean Drive. • Alternative 2: Reconstruct the roadway to add a two-way cycle track on the north side. A cycle track is an exclusive bike facility that has elements of a separated path and on-road bike lane. A cycle track, while still within the roadway, is physically separated from motor traffic and is distinct from the sidewalk. This alternative will require relocation of the existing median. One 12-foot and one 11foot travel lane would be constructed on the south side of the alignment for eastbound traffic. On the other side of a 10-foot median, an 11-foot inside and 12-foot outside lane would accommodate westbound traffic. A new 6-foot median would then be constructed to separate the cycle track from the arterial. The cycle track would be 10 feet wide and would be striped and signed as a bi-directional path. The number of existing driveways on the north side of the road may make this alternative more challenging, as access to the properties would still need to be provided. Furthermore, treatments would be necessary at both ends of the two-way cycle track to ensure bicyclists would not ride on the wrong side of the roadway beyond the termini of the cycle track, as well as at signalized intersections to alleviate potential bicycle-vehicle conflict points. • The addition/completion of a 6-foot sidewalk on the north side is also recommended. Existing development and right-of-way limitations may present challenges, but completion of the sidewalk can be incorporated into other projects or funded as a stand alone project. • Incorporate mid-block crossings (see Bike/Pedestrian Treatment sheet included in another section of this Integrated Community Sustainability Plan) to provide safer pedestrian access from residential areas on the south to the parks along Corpus Christi Bay.

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS 1. Conduct a project development/feasibility study for the Ocean Drive bicycle facilities that includes: a. Feasibility and cost/benefit analysis of potential cycle track (alternative #2) b. Identification of preferred alternative c. Coordination with the MPO, area stakeholders, and any relevant bicycle/pedestrian committees d. Creation of design guidelines for landscaping, signage and roadway markings e. Creation of guidelines for incorporating transit stops or pull-out bays 2. Identify and design crossing improvements from sidewalks along the south side to the park destinations on the north side, including potential options such as median refuges and staggered crossings as discussed on the Bike/Pedestrian Treatment sheet. 3. Coordinate with MPO and TxDOT as appropriate to begin programming for needed modifications through various potential funding programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds, general roadway funds, and local funds. 4. Prioritize implementation of the proposed steps through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility, if applicable. 5. Design and construct improvements as funding becomes available, or in coordination with standard resurfacing projects.

Page 21

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Ocean Drive EXISTING SECTION

ALTERNATIVE 1

ALTERNATIVE 2

The existing Ocean Boulevard corridor has an urban typical section with two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction, 7-foot bicycle lanes, and a 10-foot raised, landscaped median. There is a 5-foot sidewalk at the back of curb on the south side of the road.

Alternative 1 would involve a simple restriping of the existing pavement to narrow the travel lanes to 11 feet, and provide a 3-foot striped buﬀer between the bicycle lane (narrowed slightly to 6 feet) and the travel lanes. In addition, a 6-foot sidewalk is proposed to be added to the north side of the road.

Alternative 2 involves the reconstruction of the corridor to provide a median separated two-way cycle track on the north side of the road, which would necessitate the existing travel lanes and median being shifted to the south. Like Alternative 1, this alternative also includes construction of a new 6-foot sidewalk on the north side of the road.

EXISTING SECTION PHOTOS

EXAMPLE PHOTOS

1 (Left) The existing Ocean Drive typical section has two travel lanes in each direction, a narrow median, and bicycle lanes. (Right) There are several locations where the southbound bicycle lane is not continuous through an intersection, including this location at the Ennis Joslin Road intersection.

(1) Example of a buffered bicycle lane in Corpus Christi on Commodores Drive. (2) Example of a buffered bicycle lane, Austin, TX. (3) Use of a green bicycle lane to highlight a conflict point between through bicycle traffic and motor vehicle traffic turning right from a side street, Austin, TX. This treatment could be used at locations along Ocean Drive such as Ennis Joslin Road and Airline Drive. (4) Example of a median separated two-way cycle track, St. Petersburg, FL. (5) Graphic showing a median separated two-way cycle track and the potential use of green pavement where driveway traffic would be required to cross the cycle track.

OCEAN DRIVE Page 22

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Old Brownsville Road

RD LE VIL NS OW BR OLD

NAVIGATION BLVD

DEL MAR COLLEGE WEST CAMPUS

AIRPORT RD

AERIAL

GABE LOZANO SR. GOLF COURSE

CLIF MAUS DR

BEAR LN

HORNE RD

EXISTING CONDITIONS

RECOMMENDATIONS

Old Brownsville Road between South Padre Island Drive and Airport Road is a four-lane arterial with a two-way center turn lane. Existing development is low-density in this corridor, with few existing driveways or access points. On the south side of the roadway the Gabe Lozano Sr. Golf Course extends from Airport Road to Horne Road. There is a small amount of residential development adjacent to the corridor at Horne Road and scattered small industrial / commercial uses along the rest of the corridor. The Del Mar College West Campus is adjacent to the corridor on the north side at Airport Road. Existing corridor characteristics include:

The current low level of development in this corridor provides a signiﬁcant opportunity to enhance the current roadway for all users and incorporate complete street elements while maintaining the current arterial function for automobiles. The addition of multi-modal features and enhancements, in conjunction with strategic access planning, could provide more transportation choices while simultaneously providing relatively high speed arterial connectivity for local and regional travelers. Recommendations for this corridor include:

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

Four 12’-15’ travel lanes with a 14’ center turn lane Approximately 68’ of pavement, curb to curb 5’ sidewalks along both sides of roadway Approximately 120’ feet from back of sidewalk to the back of sidewalk No bicycle lanes/trails 14,000 average trips per day (2009) 45 MPH posted speed limit Served by Transit Route #16 between Enterprise Parkway and Horne Road Provides direct access to Del Mar College West Campus Provides access to West Oso High School via Bear Lane Provides access to West Oso and JFK Elementary Schools via Clif Maus Road Provides access to the VA outpatient Clinic and the Employment Center at SPID Few Driveways or signalized intersections

ISSUES SO UT HP AD RE ISL AN DD R.

In its current form, the Old Brownsville Road corridor is very auto-oriented. There is little need for the existing two-way center left turn lane, as there are few existing driveways. Other than its main entrance, the golf course fronts the roadway for approximately half of the south side of the corridor and should not need additional access. The existing high speed arterial traﬃc on the corridor creates concerns for bicyclist or pedestrian crossings and there are no existing bicycle facilities in the corridor. Five foot sidewalks are present on both sides of the roadway, but there is little landscaping and few pedestrian amenities. The concept plan for this Destination Node identiﬁes the potential for residential development both north and south of Old Brownsville Road, integrated with the existing and potential future employment opportunities and mixed used development between Old Brownsville Road and Bear Lane. Principal needs for this corridor include: • • • •

Expanding multi-modal opportunities Controlling access and maintain roadway function Creating safe crossing points for pedestrians/cyclists Enhancing landscaping and livability features

The incorporation of a 14-foot wide median would necessitate that access to all unsignalized roadways and driveways be limited to directional left turns (i.e., left turns from Old Brownsville Road, but no left turns permitted from the side street), since 14 feet is not a suﬃcient width to store a vehicle in the median in the middle of a two-stage left turn from a side street. In addition, the speed limit along the corridor may warrant being lowered as development occurs and the character of the corridor changes over time; the narrower lane widths recommended would help to achieve lower speeds.

• Addition of a landscaped median: There is little need for the existing two way center turn lane under current conditions. The addition of a landscape median will provide opportunities to: º Control access points, turn lanes and driveways º Provide opportunities for pedestrian refuges for mid-block crossings, and intersection crossings º Provide traffic calming by visually narrowing the corridor º Enhance the corridor for all users. • Limit access points and driveways: There are currently few access points and driveways along this corridor. By limiting the driveway or intersection spacing and requiring cross access easements, the number of potential turning movements will be reduced, maintaining the arterial function of the corridor and increasing safety for motorists and other users of the roadway. • Narrow the travel lanes and restripe to include a bicycle lane in both directions • Incorporate the planned multi-use trail on the north side of the roadway, instead of the south, with appropriate safe crossings, to provide additional access to Del Mar College West Campus and the potential future development as identified in the concept plan for the Destination Node

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS 1. Develop an overlay district for this Destination Node to include the Old Brownsville Road corridor a. Include standards for access, distance, spacing, and type b. Require cross-access easements for adjacent uses c. Include design guidelines for landscaping, street amenities, and driveway placement d. Coordinate with RTA on future transit needs including pads for shelters or pull out bays 2. Begin Project Development or Feasibility study to assess the need for/feasibility of: a. Addition of a landscaped median b. Location/type of appropriate turn lanes c. Location of midblock crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists d. Improvements to the existing crossings at Clif Maus Drive, Navigation/Horne Road, and Bear Lane e. Improvements to the existing intersection of Old Brownsville Road and Airport Road f. Access to Del Mar College West Campus for bicyclists and pedestrians 3. Coordinate with MPO/TxDOT to begin programming for needed improvements through various potential funding programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds, and general roadway funds. 4. Prioritize the implementation of the proposed steps through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility. 5. Design and construct improvements as funding becomes available, or in partnership with private interests who propose development projects along the corridor.

Page 23

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Old Brownsville Road EXISTING TYPICAL

EXISTING SECTION PHOTOS

The existing Old Brownsville Road corridor has an urban typical section with two travel lanes in each direction and a continuous two-way left turn lane. Existing 5-foot sidewalks are set back nearly 20 feet from the edge of curb.

The existing 5-lane Old Brownsville Road section between SPID and Airport Drive.

ALTERNATIVE TYPICAL SECTION

EXAMPLE PHOTOS

(1) Example four-lane divided arterial roadway with bike lanes, Chapel Hill, NC. (2) Example four-lane divided arterial roadway with bike lane and adjacent off-street shared-use path. Providing both on-street and off-street facilities allows bicyclists to choose the facility that is most appropriate for their use and comfort level. (3) Example four-lane divided arterial roadway with adjacent off-street shared-use path. (4) Although this 6-lane divided arterial roadway with bike lanes in Gainesville, FL has a 45 mph posted speed, all travel lanes are 11 feet wide.

The proposed alternative would provide a raised, landscaped median, narrower 11-foot travel lanes and bicycle lanes, as well as a shared-use path on the south side.

OLD BROWNSVILLE ROAD Page 24

HDR, inc. 555 N. Carancahua St #1650 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 361.857.2211