Draft Streetscape Study by LACDC

Los Alamos

â&#x20AC;˘ study area downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Project Overview & Purpose

REVISED DRAFT

24 September 2012

Table of Contents

Project Overview & Purpose

Project Overview and Purpose

Background Downtown Los Alamos, has evolved over the past six decades from a “temporary” federal laboratory site into a traditional multi-functional downtown area. The downtown was not originally planned as a town center and contains a variety of right-of-way configurations. Street frontages vary in dimension and ownership, with some private improvements within the public right-of-way. Sidewalks are of various widths, materials and condition.

Existing Conditions Analysis Overview Stakeholder Comments and Concerns Design Recommendations Overview Sidewalk and Streetscape Framework 15th 20th Knecht Deacon Central Trinity Typical Intersection Treatments Landscape + Furnishings Palette Wayfinding + Monumentation Code Recommendations Private Development Site Design Landscape Maintenance Streetscape Maintenance Priorities and Phasing Capital Project Priorities Construction Costs Grant and Funding Opportunities Acknowledgements Funding for this study provided by a grant obtained by Los Alamos Mainstreet from New Mexico Mainstreet Capital Outlay Funds.

Much of the Downtown was originally developed in larger blocks, and some portions of public right-ofway between Trinity Drive and Central Avenue were also sold off to private developers. The resulting 600foot “superblocks” are out of scale with pedestrian-oriented use, and result in reduced street frontage (streetscape) in downtown. Over the past seveal decades, some streetscape improvements have been made (primarily to Central Avenue), but there remains a need to enhance the pedestrian experience in downtown and prioritize improvements within the right-of-way. The downtown is also in need of design guidelines or standards for street frontages to create a more unified and contextual “sense of place” evoking the unique Los Alamos brand, and guide public and private development of street frontage in a unified manner. Related Documents and Studies Many planning efforts, studies and guidelines have recently been completed with the same goal of improving the experience, character and economic viability of the Downtown. These guiding documents also serve as the basis for many of the design recommendations in this report in conjunciton with the existing conditions analysis. At the completion of the Sidewalk & Streetscape Assessment study, the following documents have been completed and adopted by Los Alamos County. Key relevant goals of each document are also noted below. Creative District Architectural Design Guidelines Downtown Plan Trail Plan, Canyon Rim Trail ....

Contributing Stakeholder Comments: xx xx xx

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Existing Conditions overview

Transportation and Circulation • Roadways provide acceptable level of service for vehicles but lack in accomodation of bikes and pedestrians • Some roadways have narrow ROW widths that make accomodating all modes more challenging (50/60’ vs 80’) • Mid-block pedestrian crossings are not signalized which works well currently. As population increases and redevelopment occurs, the addition of pedestrian activated signals or additional visual detection may be warranted. • On-street parking is well used where provided. • Pedestrian routes from off-street parking to destinations are not clearly defined and lack separation from vehicles. • Roadway lane widths are consistent with NMDOT standards. Streetscape Character and Materials • General character of the streetscape is inconsistent and does not convey a singular image for the downtown • Many of the furnishings and materials have been installed over time. Dated benches and trash receptacles are currently being upgraded/replaced by the County as funds allow. • Memorial benches have been installed in a consistant standard since 2005. Replacement or upgrade of any memorial benches • There is minimal differentiation between Historic District streetscape character and the rest of downtown. • Hardscape materials vary and lack consistency to convey a single image for the downtown. Varied hardscape materials have been installed over time and replaced when impacted by adjacent development. • Placement of specialty hardscape materials (stamped concrete) is inconsistent and lacks visual impact. • Placement of amenities in the sidewalk is inconsistent - creating potential navigational conflicts and issues for disabled users. • Stamped and colored concrete used in sidewalks is problematic and cannot be well matched when repaired. • “Victorian” acorn pedestrian lights pre-date actual development of downtown and are not in keeping with downtown Architectural Design Guidelines. • Banner and flag placement is not being fully utilized. • Benches, trash receptacles and other site furnishings are of inconsistent character and do not convey a singular image for the downtown. • Many site furnishings are in poor condition and in need of replacement. • Color of roadway light poles is inconsistent and many are in need of re-painting. • Roadway light fixture styles are inconsistent. Sidewalks • Sidewalk widths too narrow in most locations with the exception of Central. • Many newer sidewalks have top layer flaking off similiar to spalling. • Condition of sidewalk surface is average to poor in most locations and does not meet current ADA requirements (with the exception of new construction on Knecht and15th). • Most sidewalks not wide enough to accomodate outdoor dining or displays which could help activate the streetscape.

Landscape • Landscape palette is inconsistent due to damage/loss and installation over time. • Lack of replacement of damaged street trees and plantings negatively impacts the streetscape character. • Hanging pots add desireable character and color to the streetscape. • Mulch type and installation depth is inconsistent. • Many roadways lacking sufficient plantings and street trees to achieve desirable downtown character and enhance pedestrian experiences. • Landscape does not successfully screen parking lots in most areas. • Many inconsistencies in method of placement for plantings - ie: raised planter wall, flush planter, flush planter with low railing. • Many planting bed areas are too small to sustain plant material. Intersections and Pedestrian Safety • Most intersection curb ramps do not meet current ADA standards. • Directional placement of many dome paving areas (including new construction) does not meet current ADA standards. • Several sidewalks have landscape or other appurtenances extending into the sidewalk, providing minimal clearance and are not in compliance with current ADA standards. • Intersection crossings lack any textural delineation, visual cues or enhanced design. Signage and Wayfinding • Vehicular directional signage lacking - including to off-street parking, historic district and downtown. • No signage or sense of entry into the downtown from the east or west. • Placement and quality of private development ID signs is inconsistent. • Pedestrian kiosk placement and quantity needs improvement. • Historic walking tour and Cultural District signage/icons are not visible/obvious enough. Maintenance • Poor maintenance of private parcel landscape buffers is negatively impacting the character and quality of the streetscape. Some street trees have been cut down or are in poor condition on private property adjacent to the ROW, particularly on Trinity. • Maintenance and replacement of plant material in the public ROW is inconsistent. This is primarily due to frequent disturbance by construction/utility projects. • Maintenance and replacement of sidewalks is inconsistent. This is primarily due to frequent disturbance by construction/utility projects. • Uitility line locate markings are negatively impacting the character of the streetscape. • Public Art and Signature Design Elements • Although some public art is currently located within the study area, pieces are far apart and lack any connectivity via signature or other smaller artful elements. • Art on private properties (such as the Science Museum water feature) are not highly integrated into the streetscape. • Existing Cultural Distruct signage does not strongly support the conveyence of art along the streetscape. • Opportunities are not fully realized to maximize the impact of both ancestral and colonial history or science/technology based icons. • Existing “bird” imprints in paving are partly used to designate the Historical Walking Tour, but their impact is not maximized or integrated into the rest of the streetscape design.

stakeholder comments & concerns summary Transportation and Circulation • Trinity is seen as a major barrier for pedestrians. • Visual impression for visitors driving through along Trinity is negative. • South side of Trinity does not feel well connected to the rest of the Downtown in terms of character, feel or landuse. • Trinity has priority for vehicular traffic movements and is a critical daily commuter link. • Central is generally seen as a good example of design for streetscape and roadway, accommodating both vehicles and pedestrians. • Bulb outs and mid-block crossings on Central work well for traffic calming. • Bike circulation is not clearly identified within the downtown. • County Public Works Department has explored re-alignment of 20th Street at Trinity to consolidate intersections and provide simplified access to the south of Trinity near the Smart House site. • County is exploring road donation of Trinity from NMDOT • Design for roundabout at Trinity/Central/4th will be occurring through NMDOT beginning in fall 2012. • On-street parking is needed and well used along most of Central. • Bikes tend to use Central through downtown, but bike lane ends west of Library for east-bound travel and many use the sidewalks. Sidewalks • Many inconsistencies in design due to improvements being completed over time. • Utility relocation projects and other capital projects have caused damage to much of the sidewalk and streetscape on Central over the years, requiring patching of sidewalks. • Sidewalks on Trinity - particularly the south side - are in poor condition. Streetscape Character and Materials • Stamped concrete medians being used elsewhere in town are well received. • Stamped and colored concrete used in sidewalks is problematic and cannot be well matched when repaired. • Some in community do not like look of new standard concrete’s white appearance from sealants. A “weathered” finish was required to be installed near the Historic District. • Pedestrian lighting has been a controversial topic in the downtown. Some feel existing Victorian Era fixtures are not an appropriate reflection Los Alamos history or compatible with the downtown Architectural Design Guidelines. • New construction on Knecht is the most recent installation of landscape/hardscape materials, but is not necessarily an adopted standard. • Character – focus on science and technology with southwestern twist • Architecture – post modern with historic references - projects implemented under new guidelines have been well received. • Banner and flag program needs to be re-implemented and maintained - helps activate the downtown and market the downtown identity and advertise for upcoming events Intersections and Pedestrian Safety • Curb ramp design and locations are inconsistent due to varied design standards as projects were implemented over many years. • Much of the current sidewalks and drive access curb ramps do not meet current ADA standards. • Lack of visual and detection devices deters visually impaired residents from crossing some streets (ie: truncated domes, ped refuges, scored crosswalks, etc.) • Current codes only allow for mid block (or non-signalized) pedestrian crossings on 2-lane roadways (one lane each way).

Landscape • Landscape character has improved greatly over the years. • New median and round-about installations in town are good examples of landscape palette and character. • Hanging pots are well received. • Rock cobble/mulch in planted areas has been most successful with minimal use of bark mulch in median areas only. Signage and Wayfinding • Parking signage lacking – need to direct visitors to empty/under-used lots • Recently implemented info kiosks design is well liked. • Site ID/Monument signs are very inconsistent in location/materials/quality - could a consistent identity be created for the downtown? • Vehicular wayfinding from US 285 is lacking – needs to be updated and add destinations • Los Alamos welcome sign is miles from actual Downtown entry Maintenance • Public Works maintains all sidewalks, hardscape and light fixtures, Parks maintains all landscape materials. • Parks has taken on maintenance of several additional areas recently that have been found to be in the public ROW within the downtown. • Some of current design for streetscape, bulb-outs, etc are problematic for snow removal causing pavement and curb damage. • Landscape areas are negatively impacted by snow removal, ice removal chemicals and roadway sanding. • No specific budgets or programs in place for sidewalk or landscape maintenance/replacement. • Many landscape areas/bulb-outs are trampled by foot traffic, driven over by drivers and construction vehicles. • Parks Department currently uses their annual general landscape budget to install new and replace damaged plant materials. Plants are replaced in early Fall and Spring. • Irrigation is not available for some of the hanging pots on Central. • Prefer use and look of rock cobble and mulch to bark mulch in landscape beds. Opportunities • Many utility relocation projects are planned or underway currently - providing the opportunity for sidewalk and streetscape enhancements and upgrades. • Historic Sculpture plan - determine placement of sculptures within the public ROW. Provide sight-lines to each to lead visitors through downtown. • Roundabout at 502 (Trinity/Central/4th) as significant gateway to downtown. • Historic walking tour is well used, but not conveyed well through site design - existing “bird” icons are not obvious enough and do not provide any directional info. • Farmers Market site is empty much of the week - potential to activate this space with other uses? • Potential for Event Center to activate green space at Main Street Center. • Creative and Cultural District - needs further definition and placemaking efforts. • Deacon - Potential to transform into a true street or paseo combining vehicle and ped traffic – Add angled parking on south side • Leverage current efforts by multiple stakeholders (County, business owners, Historic District, Arts in Public Places, Historical Society, Chamber, of Commerce to establish sense of identity for downtown • Take advantage of the fact that LANL is still operational - still #1 visitor draw

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Existing Conditions

Roadway

Condition

Present

3=good condition 2= average condition 1=poor condition Item

Category

central

ROW width 50’/80’ On-Street Parking - Parallel x 2 Roadway Travel Lane Widths 11’ 2 Vertical Curb/Gutter x 2 Roll-over Curb/Gutter x 2 Bike Lane Turn Lane (at 15th) x 2 Raised Median Accel/Decel Lane Posted Speed Limit 25 Mid-Block Crossings x 2 Traffic Signal (at 15th) x 2 Stop - 2 way (side streets) x 2 Stop - 4 way Sidewalk Average Sidewalk Width 5’ 2 Min Sidewalk Width 4’ Max Sidewalk Width 10’ Sidewalk Outside ROW x 2 Stamped Concrete x 2 Colored Concrete x 1 ADA Ramp Compliance 3 Sidewalk Joints/Surface 2 Sidewalk Clearance 2 Streetscape Street Trees (consistent) x 2 Site Furnishings x 3 Roadway Lighting x 2 Pedestrian Lighting x 1 Accent Lighting/GFI’s x 2 Bulb-outs x 2 Landscape - in ROW x 2 Landscape - outside ROW x 2 Hanging Pots x 2 Raised Planters x 3 Wayfinding Kiosks x 1 Transit Stops x 2 Historic Walking Tour Route x

10’ walk

minimal bulb out planting

obstacles/obstructions 13’ walk in sidewalk

raised planter bed walls in need of repair

6.5’ to 9.5’ walk

parking lot buffer w/in ROW

MAIN

FULLER LODGE

20.5’ walk

6.5’ walk

retail monument sign hidden, overgrown landscape

matchline - 1

MUSEUM

CENTRAL

20TH

ASHLEY POND

matchline - 2

FUTURE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT

drainage channels colleting debris in some bulb-outs

NEW COUNTY BUILDING

many single parking spaces this block

4.5’ walk

existing ROW has parking lot vs street feel

existing ROW - parking lot vs street feel

CENTRAL KNECHT

MERRIMAC SHOPPING CENTER

much of existing bulb-out plantings damaged by construction and utility work

bulb outs approx 70’ o.c. create multiple single parking spaces

6.5’ walk

transition to 4’ ht wall extends to 4th

conflicts from multiple drive accesses

roll-over curb is often damaged by cars in this area

social paths/jaywalking problem this block from residences to Merrimac shopping center

private parcel landscape not well maintained and makes poor entry statement into downtown

delineation of on-street parking vs travel lanes unclear in this area 4TH

low wall begins

50’ ROW

multiple street trees in need of replacement this block

7TH

bulb-out/streetscape plantings end

three panel colored concrete walks added this block

NM 50

CENTRAL

ITY

TRIN

potential conflict w/ turning movements

problematic storm drainage area

50’ ROW

width and location of drive aisles problematic for pedestrians

potential to relocate sculpture with NMDOT project

rear yard fencing and lack of landscape un-appealing downtown entry statement

Los Alamos

100

200 feet

matchline - 2

landscape enhancements needed in some detached planters

50’ ROW

7TH

4’ walk

80’ ROW

9TH

6’ walk

matchline - 3

parking lot buffer w/in ROW

parking lot buffer w/ angled stamped concrete cracked street trees mature/ good hanging pots this block in ROW in many areas this block condition this block with no irrigation

streetcape transition to parklike character

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Existing Conditions

ROW width On-Street Parking - Parallel Roadway Travel Lane Widths Vertical Curb/Gutter Roll-over Curb/Gutter Bike Lane Turn Lane Raised Median Accel/Decel Lane Posted Speed Limit Mid-Block Crossings Traffic Signal Stop - 2 way Stop - 4 way Sidewalk Average Sidewalk Width Min Sidewalk Width Max Sidewalk Width Sidewalk Outside ROW Stamped Concrete Colored Concrete ADA Ramp Compliance Sidewalk Joints/Surface Sidewalk Clearance Streetscape Street Trees (consistent) Site Furnishings Roadway Lighting Pedestrian Lighting Accent Lighting/GFI’s Bulb-outs Landscape - in ROW Landscape - outside ROW Hanging Pots Raised Planters Wayfinding Kiosks Transit Stops Historic Walking Tour Route

Roadway

Condition

Present

Item

Category

trinity

80’

12’ 2

x x

2 1 35

4’ 4’ 6’

x x

2 1 1 1 1 2

x x

1 1

4’ attached walk

views through to Deacon St. previous 17th St ROW

4.5’ detached walk 4’ landscape strip

parking lot buffer w/in ROW

poorly maintained /overgrown landscape in many areas

matchline - 1

15TH

drive blocked by bollards

20TH

4’ detached walk w/ 2’ landscape strip

TRINITY

parking lot buffer w/ in ROW

new curb ramps w/ yellow glue-down dome panels

landscape strips contain no plantings

sidewalks on south side in particularly poor condition

newly installed landscape buffer has low density of plantings

low vertical/ retaining wall

parking lot buffer w/in ROW

development/landscape recessed from roadway

matchline - 2

KNECHT

5.5’ walk

narrow landscape strip problematic

80’ ROW

inconsistent median treatments

mature trees removed but not conflicts with multiple replaced, no low level screen access drives plantings for parking MERRIMAC SHOPPING CENTER

TRINITY

variety of curb ramp designs, narrow parking none ADA compliant lot buffer

multiple vacant/un-maintained parcels on south

curb and vehicle circulation not well defined in this area

no sidewalk north side to Central

80’ ROW

potential ped crossing conflict location once Smith’s moves south of Trinity

shopping center ID lacking

potential round-about location

matchline - 3

sidewalk ends

new traffic signal cabinets not wellintergated into streetscape design

matchline - 2

many peds attempt to cross at 20th to reach County offices/hotel

TRINITY

sidewalk ends

median island lacking landscape

80’ ROW

no sidewalk south side

guardrail and 6’ wood fence lack visual appeal

Los Alamos

100

200 feet

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

20th

Roadway

ROW width 63’/50’ On-Street Parking - Parallel x 2 Roadway Travel Lane Widths Vertical Curb/Gutter x 2 Roll-over Curb/Gutter Bike Lane Turn Lane x x Raised Median Accel/Decel Lane Posted Speed Limit 25 Mid-Block Crossings Traffic Signal Stop - 2 way x 2 Stop - 4 way Sidewalk Average Sidewalk Width 6’ 3 Min Sidewalk Width 4’ Max Sidewalk Width 13’ Sidewalk Outside ROW Stamped Concrete Colored Concrete ADA Ramp Compliance 2 Sidewalk Joints/Surface x 2 Sidewalk Clearance x 3 Streetscape Street Trees (consistent) Site Furnishings x 2 Roadway Lighting x 2 Pedestrian Lighting Accent Lighting/GFI’s Bulb-outs Landscape - in ROW x 2 Landscape - outside ROW x 1 Hanging Pots Raised Planters Wayfinding Kiosks Transit Stops Historic Walking Tour Route

15th

Roadway

ROW width On-Street Parking - Parallel x Roadway Travel Lane Widths Vertical Curb/Gutter x Roll-over Curb/Gutter Bike Lane Turn Lane x Raised Median Accel/Decel Lane Posted Speed Limit Mid-Block Crossings Traffic Signal (at Trinity) x Stop - 2 way x Stop - 4 way Sidewalk Average Sidewalk Width 6’ Min Sidewalk Width 4’ Max Sidewalk Width 13’ Sidewalk Outside ROW Stamped Concrete Colored Concrete ADA Ramp Compliance x Sidewalk Joints/Surface x Sidewalk Clearance x Streetscape Street Trees (consistent) Site Furnishings Roadway Lighting x Pedestrian Lighting Accent Lighting/GFI’s Bulb-outs Landscape - in ROW x Landscape - outside ROW x Hanging Pots Raised Planters Wayfinding Kiosks Transit Stops Historic Walking Tour Route

60’’ 2 3

25 2 2 2 3

1 2 3

3 1

Knecht

Roadway

Condition

Present

Item

Category

Condition

Present

Item

Category

Condition

Present

Item

Category

Existing Conditions

ROW width 70’/47’ On-Street Parking - Parallel x 2 Roadway Travel Lane Widths Vertical Curb/Gutter x 3 Roll-over Curb/Gutter Bike Lane Turn Lane x 3 Raised Median Accel/Decel Lane Posted Speed Limit 25 Mid-Block Crossings Traffic Signal (at Trinity) x 2 Stop - 2 way x 2 Stop - 4 way Sidewalk Average Sidewalk Width 6’ 3 Min Sidewalk Width 4’ Max Sidewalk Width 13’ Sidewalk Outside ROW Stamped Concrete Colored Concrete ADA Ramp Compliance x 1 Sidewalk Joints/Surface x 2 Sidewalk Clearance x 3 Streetscape Street Trees (consistent) Site Furnishings Roadway Lighting x 2 Pedestrian Lighting x 3 Accent Lighting/GFI’s Bulb-outs Landscape - in ROW x 3 Landscape - outside ROW x 1 Hanging Pots Raised Planters Wayfinding Kiosks Transit Stops Historic Walking Tour Route

no landscape buffer updated landscape at USFS building at public parking good model for future improvements

8’ conc walk and 3’ asphalt adjacent to curb

tree lawn good transition to Ashley Pond and Fuller Lodge character

CENTRAL

TRINITY

potential re-alignment of 20th at Trinity

20TH

parking lot screen in ROW

5.5’ walk

60’ ROW

narrow walk with porte cochere over top

new curb ramps w/ yellow glue-down dome panels

50’ ROW parking lot islands extend into ROW need maintenance

congested intersection

key view corridor to Fuller Lodge

20th

60’ ROW

TRINITY

15TH

15th 4-6’ walk 70’ ROW

very narrow landscape buffer

newly installed landscape buffer has low density of plantings

47’ ROW

TRINITY

CENTRAL

KNECHT

Los Alamos

100

200 feet

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Roadway

x x

60’ 2 14’ 2

0’

x x

1 2 2

x x

1 1

Roadway

Condition

Present

Item

Main (Private)

Category

Condition

Present

Item

Deacon

Category

Existing Conditions

NA NA x

x x

x x x 6’ 4’ 6’

NA 3 3 3 3

x x

1 2 3

curb/entry from 20th not well defined

roadway lighting already existing

no screening of dumpsters

parking zone lacking islands/ 60â&#x20AC;&#x2122; ROW landscape = not pedestrian friendly

no screening to business service/ back of buildings storage withing ROW

evaulate consolidation of business accesses

deacon 0

100

200 feet

service access needs screening/ landscape improvements lacking strong visual or actual connection to Fuller Lodge site

deacon

tenant signage lacks variety and could be more visible landscape/streetscape character lacks urban feel visual focal point opportunity key pedestrian crossings drive accesses lacking street feel lawn space lacking outdoor amenities to function as community or event center gathering space

main

NOTE: all of Main is private property and privately maintained. Any suggested improvements would need to be approved by property owner.

main

Los Alamos

100

200 feet

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

lacking â&#x20AC;&#x153;streetâ&#x20AC;? presence vs drive feel

Design Recommendations overview

Transportation and Circulation • Explore roadway lane width/striping modifications to better accomodate pedestrians and bikes. • Plan for pedestrian activated signals and additional visual detection devices along roadways. • Maintain and maximize on-street parking. Add on-street parking on Deacon. On-street parking to be included on all streets except Trinity. Locations of bulb-outs, aisles and planters to allow maximum on-street parking. • Evaluate on-center spacing for bulb-outs on a complete street basis rather than project by project to determine best balance of streetscape character and parking. • Ensure code requirements for private development address appropriate pedestrian connectivity within and into properties. Sidewalks • Establish minimum 6’ walk width in vehicular priority corridors, and minimum 10’ walk width in pedestrian priority corridors. • Add sidewalks where currently missing - primarily on Trinity. • Where restaurant/retail redevelopment is desired establish 15’ minimum sidewalk width. Streetscape Character and Materials • Establish streetscape standards for each of the three identified zones in the Framework Plan - historic, gateway and downtown. • Streetscape standards to include hardscape materials, crosswalks, planters, seat walls, bulb-outs, furnishings, lighting, landscape. • • Historic Zone • Downtown Zone • Gateway Zone • Landscape • Establish landscape palette for each of the three identified zones in the Streetscape and Sidewalk Framework - historic, gateway and downtown. • Ensure proper irrigation is available for installation of hanging pots or other landscape beds. • Refine development codes to ensure parking lots on private developments properly screen parking and utilize a plant palette compatible with the public right-of-way. • Establish minimum sizes for planting beds, bulb-outs and other landscape areas to better ensure survivability

of plant materials. • Evaluate clear-distance/setback requirements for landscape materials from the travel lane to reduce driveover issues and chemical overspray damage. (typically 30” from face of curb). • Consider replacing existing small landscape beds and bulb-outs with paved materials where appropriate. Intersections and Pedestrian Safety • Coordinate capital improvement projects to include ramp replacements. • Implement an annual or semi-annual replacement program for non ADA-compliant curb ramps. • Review public works standards to ensure best design for curb ramps within the downtown area. This may vary from NMDOT standards. • Evaluate potential for use of concrete or paver intersections and/or crosswalks to enhance pedestrian experience and prolong pavement life. Signage and Wayfinding • Establish east and west gateways into the downtown. • Complete a signage and wayfinding plan to coordinate placement of all signage within the downtown in coordination with streetscape standards, rather than install individual signs in a piecemeal fashion. • Develop signage design guidelines/code updates for private development ID signs within the three identified zones in the Framework Plan - historic, gateway and downtown. • Evaluate historic walking tour and Cultural District identification methods and locations in conjunction with wayfinding plan. Maintenance • Establish annual or semi-annual sidewalk replacement budget and program. • Establish seasonal banner installation and maintenance program. • Establish annual or semi annual painting/refinishing program for light poles. Establish annual budget and program for trees and plant material in the public right-of-way. • Establish tree replacement requirements for trees maintained by private owners adjacent to the public right-of-way. • Clarify responsibility of maintenance and ownership of all landscape beds within the public right-of-way and review with individual property owners. • Coordinate streetscape capital improvement projects as closely as possible with planned utility and infrastructure upgrades to minimize damage and re-installation of streetscape.

4TH roundabo downtown

potential alley/ped path

teen center Deacon Complete M Street E

Ful potential Lo

sidewalk and streetscape framework

historic streetscape zone downtown streetscape zone gateway streetscape zone vehiclular priority corridor ped/bike priority corridor multi-use corridor

TEEN CENTER TRANSIT CENTER

FULLER LODGE

main

EVENT CENTER

parking priority corridor secondary ped corridor

MAIN STREET GREEN

primary trail connection

potential park once garage

BRADBURY SCIENCE MUSEUM

FUTURE MIXED-USE

COUNTY BUILDING

linear art opportunity

central

art opportunity

deacon potential park once garage

knecht

ASHLEY POND

15th

kiosk opportunity 20th

Transit

add canyon rim trail cult dist remove event center

primary downtown gateway opportunity

potential park once garage

secondary downtown gateway opportunity public gathering space

trinity

redevelopment opportunity

SMITHâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S

note park once per DT plan

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Design Recommendations trinity

SUMMARY - EXISTING CONDITIONS

4-6’ 4-5’ 1-3’ landscape walk lands

13’ travel lane

12’ travel lane

12’ turn lane 80’ ROW

12’ travel lane

13’ travel lane

5’ walk

Overall Streetscape Width

80’

Flowline/travel width

62’

Ped Crossing width

62’

Ped Refuge

EXISTING CONDITIONS

SUMMARY - OPTION A Overall Streetscape Width

80’

Flowline/travel width

58’

Ped Crossing width

58’

Ped Refuge

NEGATIVE FEATURES Long ped crossing width Narrow sidewalk (6’ pref) Narrow landscape (8’ pref) POSITIVE FEATURES No easements required Adds landscape buffer Sidewalk wider than existing CONSIDERATIONS Travel lanes narrower than standard 5’ walk

6’ landscape

12’ travel lane

OPTION A - all features in ROW

11’ travel lane

12’ striped turn 80’ ROW

11’ travel lane

12’ travel lane

6’ landscape

5’ walk

Where ROW is sub 80’, sidewalk and landscape may need to be narrowed Street trees overhang travel lanes

SUMMARY - OPTION B Overall Streetscape Width

86’

Flowline/travel width

60’

Ped Crossing width Ped Refuge

23-34’ yes

NEGATIVE FEATURES Easement required on south Narrow ped refuge (3’) Narrow landscape on south (8’ pref) POSITIVE FEATURES Adds median and ped refuge Adds landscape buffer Wider sidewalks CONSIDERATIONS Travel lanes narrower than standard 6’ walk

8’ landscape

12’ travel lane

11’ travel lane

14’ turn/median/refuge 80’ ROW

11’ travel lane

12’ travel lane

6’ landscape

6’ walk

6’ landscape on south could be expanded if larger easement acquired Street trees overhang travel lanes

OPTION B - north sidewalk in ROW, south in easement SUMMARY - OPTION C Overall Streetscape Width

92’

Flowline/travel width

64’

Ped Crossing width Ped Refuge

24-37’ yes

NEGATIVE FEATURES Easement required north and south Narrow ped refuge (3’) Impacts to existing developments both north and south POSITIVE FEATURES Adds median and ped refuge Adds landscape buffer at pref width Wider sidewalks at pref width Standard travel and turn lane widths CONSIDERATIONS evaluate 92’ wide corridor impacts 6’ walk

8’ landscape

12’ travel lane

16’ turn/median/refuge 80’ ROW

12’ travel lane

8’ landscape

6’ walk

walk and landscape width could vary depending on property owner Street trees overhang travel lanes

OPTION C - north and south sidewalks outside ROW in easement

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Design Recommendations deacon

16’ 4’ parking aisle per existing - WB landsc

6’ walk

16’ angled parking

16’ travel lane - EB 60’ ROW

16’ angled parking

6’ walk

OPTION A - angled/angled parking - one-way - approx 95+ spaces

SUMMARY - OPTION A Flowline/travel width

58’

Ped Crossing width

58’

FEATURES/CONSIDERATIONS Buffers both sides Maximizes parking Trees in bulb-outs only Sidewalks both sides

SUMMARY - OPTION B Flowline/travel width

58’

Ped Crossing width

58’

FEATURES/CONSIDERATIONS Buffers from north parking Street trees in grate continuous Parking both sides Sidewalks one side only

4’ 16’ parking aisle per existing - WB lndsc

16’ angled parking

16’ travel lane

11’ travel lane

8’ parallel parking

60’ ROW

OPTION B - angled/parallel parking - two-way - approx 73+ spaces

9’ walk

4’ landsc

5’ walk

8’ parallel parking

12’ travel lane

8’ parallel parking

5’ walk

50’ ROW

existing conditions 15th to 4th

SUMMARY - OPTION A - 15th to 4th Flowline

38’

Ped Crossing width

22’

FEATURES/CONSIDERATIONS Sidewalk meets min preferred 6’ walk

8’ parallel parking

11’ travel lane

8’ parallel parking

6’ walk

Requires shift of flowline 1’ Trees in bulb-outs only per existing Travel lanes less than standard width

50’ ROW

OPTION A - 15th to 4th - reduced travel lanes/wider sidewalk

12’ walk

8’ 8’ amenity zone parallel parking

12’ travel lane

8’ parallel parking

12’ walk

8’ landscape adj to pkng lot

12’ walk

80’ ROW

20th to 15th

central

SUMMARY - 20th to 15th Flowline (per existing)

38’

Ped Crossing width (per existing)

24’

20th

11’ travel lane

11’ travel lane 50’ ROW

10’ tree lawn

6’ walk

SUMMARY - 20th to 15th Flowline

22’

Ped Crossing width

22’

FEATURES/CONSIDERATIONS

Simplify amenity zone placement

Wide sidewalk adj to Ashley Pond

Maximize sidewalk both sides

Tree lawn on east mimics Park character

Landscape buffer - parking lots near 15th

Travel lanes less than standard No on street parking

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Design Recommendations

ON-STREET PARKING

TRAVEL LANE

ON-STREET PARKING

typical intersection treatment

standard sidewalk

20’ min setback to on-street parking

ROW

signature landscape zone

signature paving zone and ramps ROW

ROW setback for sight triangles (varies)

TRAVEL LANE

TRAVEL LANE stop bar

TRAVEL LANE

TRAVEL LANE 10’ wide crosswalk 6’ x 10’ pedestrian refuge raised paved or planted median nose LEFT TURN

LEFT TURN raised paved or planted median nose

TRAVEL LANE

Code Reccommendations overview hardscape palette

pros: • varied color tone • highest hardness/lowest water absorbption • variety of shapes, colors • cobbled character recalls local ancestral history • unique character would set apart from others • cost similar to concrete pavers cons: • more challenging to mix with other materials (ie: concrete bands, brick ADA pavers, etc) • narrower range of qualified local installers • not appropriate for roadway installation

porphrys stone paving

pros: • high hardness/low water absorbption • variety of sizes, shapes, colors • relatively experienced installers locally • available in vehiclular strength • replacement of individual pavers possible • matching ADA pavers available • can have contemporary character cons: • may need to be installed over concrete base = more cost • chipping is common if not installed properly • widely used, lacks unique character

concrete pavers

pros: • varied color palette • high hardness/low water absorbption • relatively experienced installers locally • available in vehiclular strength • replacement of individual pavers possible cons: • may need to be installed over concrete base = more cost • chipping is common if not installed properly • limited shapes • tends toward traditional historic character

brick pavers

paving options - sidewalk corners

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Design Recommendations site furnishings

Option A - existing, change all colors to black, add bike rack Option C - stainless finish

Option B - color black

Option D - stainless finish

overview existing fixture replacement options

EXISTING

Monterro

Roadway

Riverwalk

Gateway

Nevada

Del Sol

Villa

Omega

Euro

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Design Recommendations bus shelters

pre-fabricated

EXISTING

public art

custom

overview signage and seatwalls

Historic Zone

potential to color change by zone or destination type

stainless or black sign panel

colored concrete cap

stone veneer base

Gateway Zone

Downtown Zone

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Design Recommendations signature landscape palette

Street Trees (trees in grates, at grade planter areas, or elevated planters) • Catalpa • Pioneer Elm • Hackberry • Honeylocust • Shumard Oak Ornamental Trees (in elevated planters or medians only) • Winterberry Euonymous • Amur Maackia • Malus sp. • Pyrus sp. Evergreen Trees (in wide medians only) • Corkbark Fir • Columnar Austrian Pine • Dwarf Lodgepole Pine • Sesters Dwarf Blue Spruce Deciduous Shrubs (shrubs over 4’ ht in medians or buffers only) • Apache Plume • Spanish Broom • Clove Currant • Littleleaf Mountain Mahogany • Mountain Ninebark • Dark Knight Spirea • Grow Low Sumac • Three-leaf Sumac • Dwarf Rabbitbrush • Nearly Wild Rose • Russian Sage • Winterfat

Evergreen Shrubs + Groundcover • Antelope Bitterbrush • Buffalo Juniper • Common Juniper • Creeping Mahonia • Manzanita • Mops Mugo Pine • Big Tuna Mugo Pine • Birds Nest Spruce Perennials • Coreopsis • Hyssop • Penstemon • Santolina • Sedum • Yarrow Ornamental Grasses • Blue Avena • Karl Forester Feather Reed Grass • Overdam Variegated Feather Reed Grass • Little Bluestem • Llano Indian Grass • Los Lunas Giant Sacaton Grass Stone • 3/4” Rock Mulch Santa Fe Brown • 6” River Cobble • Granite Fines • Landscape Canyon Boulders

â&#x20AC;˘ IMAGE TO BE ADDED

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment

Code Recommendations private development site design

landscape

Streetscape

Capital Project Priorities Construction Costs Grant and Funding Opportunities

Priorities & Phasing

Los Alamos

downtown sidewalk & streetscape assessment