Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
One-Way to Two-Way Conversion_9th-11th, Elm and Pine Streets
March 15, 2013 Iowa Department of Transportation District 6 Office 5455 Kirkwood Blvd. SW Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 319 - 364 -0235 FAX: 319 - 364 -9614 kentellis@dotiowa.gov Ref: TCSP- 052- 2(129) -9S -31 City of Dubuque Dubuque County Agreement No. 2013 -E -259 Mr. Gus Psihoyos City Engineer City of Dubuque 50 W 13th ST Dubuque, IA 52001 SUBJECT: Agreement 2013 -E -259 ( Improvements on Elm Street (US 52) from 9th Street to 12th Street). Dear Mr. Psihoyos: I have enclosed two (2) copies of an agreement between the City of Dubuque and the Iowa Department of Transportation for the referenced project. The project involves development and completion of primary highway improvement. Please secure the necessary approvals and signatures of the appropriate county officials and return both signed copies of the agreement to this office for further processing. After I receive the signed copies of the agreement, I will sign both agreements, and one of the copies of the fully executed agreement will be returned to your office. All those who are involved with the project should carefully review the provisions of the agreement that pertain to federal funding for this project and the standard provisions for federal aid projects. Please contact me if you have any questions concerning this agreement. Sincerely, Kent L. Ellis, P.E. Local Systems Engineer District 6 KLE /gkEnclosure (2) September 2012 IOWA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Agreement for a Primary Highway Improvement Project Recipient: Dubuque, Iowa County: Dubuque Project Number: TCSP- 052 - 2(129)- -9S -31 Agreement Number: 2013 -E -259 Staff Action Number: N/A CFDA No. and Title: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction This agreement is entered into by and between the city of Dubuque, Iowa (hereinafter referred to as Recipient) and the Iowa Department of Transportation (hereinafter referred to as the Department) in accordance with Iowa Code Sections 28E.12 and 306A.7 or 307.44. Witnesseth; that Whereas, the Recipient in joint cooperation with the Department, proposes to establish or make improvements to a primary highway; and Whereas, the Recipient has received Federal funding through the Transportation and Community System Preservation (TCSP) Program, which was established by Section 1117 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Efficiency Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA -LU), Public Law 109 -59, which are hereinafter referred to as TCSP funds; and Now, therefore, in accordance with the terms of this agreement, applicable statutes, and administrative rules, the Department agrees to provide funding named above to the Recipient for the primary highway improvement project described below. The parties further agree as follows: 1. Project Information a. The Recipient shall be the lead local governmental agency for carrying out the provisions of this agreement. b. All notices required under this agreement shall be made in writing to the Department's and /or the Recipient's contact person. The Department's contact person shall be the District 6 Local Systems Engineer. The Recipient's contact person shall be the Mayor, or their designee. c. The Recipient shall be responsible for the development and completion of the following described primary highway improvement project: Improvements on Elm Street (U.S. 52) from 9th Street to 12th Street. The project provides for complete street reconstruction with intersection improvements. 2. Funding Sources a. The Recipient shall receive reimbursement for costs of authorized and approved eligible project activities from TCSP funds (TCSP Project No. TCSP - 052 - 2(129)-- 95-31). The portion of the project costs reimbursed with TCSP funds shall be limited to a maximum of either 80 percent of eligible costs (other than those reimbursed with other Federal funds) or $600,000, whichever is less. 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP -052- 2(129)-- 9S- 31.docx Page 1 of 10 September 2012 b. The Recipient shall comply with the Federal -aid provisions contained in Exhibit 1 which is attached hereto and by this reference is incorporated into this agreement. c. The Recipient shall be responsible for all other project costs which are not reimbursed with or paid for by the funds specified above. 3. Environmental, Right -of -Way, Permits, and Other Requirements a. The Recipient shall be responsible for obtaining any necessary permits from the Department, such as the Right to Occupy and /or Perform Work Within the Right -of -Way, Permit of Access, Utility Accommodation, Right to Install and Maintain Traffic Control Devices, or other construction permits required for the project prior to the start of construction. Neither the approval of funding nor the signing of this agreement shall be construed as approval of any required permit from the Department. b. The Recipient shall obtain all project permits and / or approvals, when necessary, from the Iowa Department of Cultural Affairs (State Historical Society of Iowa; State Historic Preservation Officer), Iowa Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or other State or Federal agencies as may be required. c. If right-of-way is required for the project, the Recipient shall acquire the necessary right -of -way in accordance with 761 Iowa Administrative Code Chapter 111, Real Property Acquisition and Relocation Assistance. The Recipient shall submit preliminary right -of -way plans to the Department's Office of Right -of -way for review and approval prior to the commencement of any acquisition. d. Additionally, the portions right -of -way acquired for improvements to the Primary Road System shall be acquired in the name of the State of Iowa. The Recipient will properly close the sale of each parcel and shall furnish the Department copies of all completed contracts, deeds, conveyances and condemnation documents (for state right of way). e. If there is a railroad crossing within or near the project work area, the Recipient shall obtain the necessary approvals or agreements from the railroad to allow the proposed work to be completed on or around the railroad crossing and / or right -of -way. f. If the project requires utility relocations, subject to the approval of and without expense to the Department, the Recipient agrees to perform or cause to be performed all relocations, alterations, adjustments or removals of existing utility facilities, including but not limited to power, telephone lines, fiber optics lines, natural gas pipelines, water mains and hydrants, curb boxes, utility accesses, storm water intakes, sanitary sewers, and related poles, installations and appurtenances, whether privately or publicly owned, and all parking meters, traffic signals and other facilities or obstructions which are located within the limits of an established street or alley and which will interfere with construction of the project and the clear zone. All utility relocations shall be accomplished in accordance with the Department's Utility Accommodation Policy, as set forth in 761 Iowa Administrative Code, Chapter 115. g. If the Recipient has completed a Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for an area which is affected by the proposed primary highway project and the FIS is modified, amended or revised in an area affected by the project after the date of this agreement, the Recipient shall promptly provide notice of the modification, amendment or revision to the Department. If the Recipient does not have a detailed FIS for an area which is affected by the proposed primary highway project and the Recipient does adopt an FIS in an area affected by the project after the date of this agreement, the Recipient shall promptly provide notice of the FIS to the Department. 4. Project Design a. The Recipient shall be responsible for the design of all proposed improvements. 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP-052-2(129)--9S-3 1. docx Page 2 of 10 September 2012 b. The project plans, specifications and engineer's cost estimate shall be prepared and certified by a Professional Engineer licensed to practice in the State of Iowa. c. All proposed highway or street improvements shall be designed using good engineering judgment and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) "Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets ", (latest edition). d. The project design shall comply with the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways ", by the Federal Highway Administration, as adopted by Department, as per 761 Iowa Administrative Code, Chapter 130. e. The project shall be designed and constructed using the Department's Standard Specifications for Highway and Bridge Construction (most current edition). Prior to their use in the bidding documents, any Special Provisions or other modifications to the Standard Specifications shall be approved by the Department. f. The Recipient, in cooperation with the Department, shall take whatever steps may be required to legally establish the grade lines of the new highway facilities constructed under the project in accordance with Iowa Code Section 313.21 and 364.15. 5. Bid Letting a. The Recipient shall submit the plans, specifications, estimate, and all other contract documents for review by the Department. The project may be submitted for letting in phases, in the order of preference as determined by the Recipient. All plan submittals shall be in accordance with the Major Project schedule, as shown on the Instructional Memorandum to Local Public Agencies 3.005, Project Development Submittal Dates and Information, published by the Department's Office of Local Systems. b. The project will be let by the Department in accordance with its normal letting procedures. As a condition for the Department to let the project, the Recipient agrees that the Recipient has the financial resources to proceed with the project if bids submitted are 110% of the project cost estimate or Tess. If the Recipient is a city, the Recipient shall comply with the public hearing requirements of the Iowa Code section 26.12. c. When let by the Department, the Department will identify the lowest responsive bidder. The Department will mail a tabulation of responsive bids and three originals of the unexecuted contract to the Recipient. The Recipient shall either take action to award the contract to the lowest responsive bidder or reject all bids. Following award of contract and signature by the lowest responsive bidder, the Recipient shall forward to the Department two copies each of the fully executed contract, performance bond, and certificate of insurance. 6. Construction and Maintenance a. The Recipient shall be responsible for the daily inspection of the project, including the compilation of a daily log of materials, equipment, and labor used on the project. b. The work on this project shall be in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Any substantial modification of these plans and specifications must be approved by the Department prior to the modification being put into effect. c. The Recipient shall comply with the procedures and responsibilities for materials testing and construction inspection according to Department's Materials Instructional Memorandums (I.M.'s) and the Construction Manual. If requested, the Department may be able to perform some testing services. If performed, the Department will bill the Recipient for testing services according to its normal policy. 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP-052-2(129)--9S-3 1 .docx Page 3 of 10 September 2012 d. Primary highway through traffic will be maintained during the construction of the project. e. Traffic control devices, signing, or pavement markings installed within the limits of this project shall conform to the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways" as per 761 Iowa Administrative Code, Chapter 130. The safety of the general public shall be assured through the use of proper protective measures and devices such as fences, barricades, signs, flood lighting, and warning lights as necessary. f. Subject to the provisions hereof, the Recipient in accordance with 761 Iowa Administrative Code sections 150.3(1)c and 150.4(2) will remove or cause to be removed all encroachments or obstructions in the existing primary highway right of way. The Recipient will also prevent the erection and /or placement of any structure or obstruction on said right of way or any additional right of way which is acquired for this project including but not limited to private signs, buildings, pumps, and parking areas. g• With the exception of service connections no new or future utility occupancy of project tight-of-way, nor any future relocations of or alterations to existing utilities within said right -of -way (except service connections), will be permitted or undertaken by the Recipient without the prior written approval of the Department. All work will be performed in accordance with the Utility Accommodation Policy and other applicable requirements of the Department. h. Future maintenance of the proposed improvements shall be in accordance with 761 Iowa Administrative Code, Chapter 150. i. Upon completion of the project, no changes in the physical features thereof will be undertaken or permitted without prior written approval of the Department. j• After the project construction is complete and prior to final acceptance of the project by the Department, the Recipient shall furnish three sets of "as- built" plans to the Department's contact person. 7. Payments and Reimbursements a. The Recipient shall be responsible for making initial payments for all project costs incurred in the development and construction of the project. After payments have been made, the Recipient may submit to the Department periodic itemized claims for reimbursement for eligible project activities. Reimbursement claims shall include certification by a Professional Engineer licensed to practice in the State of Iowa that all eligible project activities for which reimbursement is requested have been paid in full and completed in substantial compliance with the terms of this agreement. b. The Department shall reimburse the Recipient for properly documented and certified claims for eligible project activity costs, less a withholding of 5% of the Federal and / or State share of construction costs, either by state warrant or by crediting other accounts from which payment may have been initially made. If upon final audit, the Department determines the Recipient has been overpaid, the Recipient shall reimburse the overpaid amount to the Department. After the final audit or review is complete and after the Recipient has provided all required paperwork, the Department will release the Federal or State funds withheld. c. Upon completion of the project, a Professional Engineer licensed to practice in the State of Iowa shall certify in writing to the Department that the project activities were completed in substantial compliance with the plans and specifications set out in this agreement. Final reimbursement of State and / or Federal funds shall be made only after the Department accepts the project as complete. 8. General Provisions 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP-052-2(129)--9S-3 1 . docx Page 4 of 10 September 2012 a. The Recipient shall maintain records, documents, and other evidence in support of the work performed under the terms of this agreement. All accounting practices applied and all records maintained will be in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and procedures. Documentation shall be made available for inspection and audit by authorized representatives of the Department and / or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), or their designees at all reasonable times.. The Recipient shall provide copies of said records and documents to the Department upon request. The Recipient shall also require its contractors to permit authorized representatives of the Department and / or the FHWA to inspect all work materials, records, and any other data with regard to agreement related costs, revenues and operating sources. Such documents shall be retained for at least 3 years from the date of FHWA approval of the final closure document. Upon receipt of such approval by FHWA, the Department will notify the Recipient of the record retention date. b. In accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 216, the Recipient shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, creed, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, pregnancy, or disability. c. The Recipient agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the Department harmless from any action or liability arising out of the design, construction, maintenance, placement of traffic control devices, inspection, or use of this project. This agreement to indemnify, defend and hold harmless applies to all aspects of the Department's application review and approval process, plan and construction reviews, and funding participation. d. If any part of this agreement is found to be void and unenforceable then the remaining provisions of this agreement shall remain in effect. e. This agreement is not assignable without the prior written consent of the Department. f. It is the intent of both parties that no third party beneficiaries be created by this agreement. g. In case of dispute concerning the terms of this agreement, the parties shall submit the matter to arbitration pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 679A. Either party has the right to submit the matter to arbitration after ten (10) days notice to the other party of their intent to seek arbitration. The written notice must include a precise statement of the disputed question. The Department and the Recipient agree to be bound by the decision of the appointed arbitrator. Neither party may seek any remedy with the State or Federal courts absent exhaustion of the provisions of this paragraph for arbitration. h. This agreement shall be executed and delivered in two or more copies, each of which so executed and delivered shall be deemed to be an original and shall constitute but one and the same instrument. This agreement, as set forth in the paragraphs above and the referenced exhibits, constitutes the entire agreement between the Department and the Recipient concerning this project. Representations made before the signing of this agreement are not binding, and neither party has relied upon conflicting representations in entering into this agreement. Any change or alteration to the terms of this agreement must be made in the form of an addendum to this agreement. Said addendum shall become effective only upon written approval of the Department and Recipient. 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP- 052 - 2(129)-- 9S- 31.docx Page 5 of 10 September 2012 In witness whereof, each of the parties hereto has executed this agreement as of the date shown opposite its signature below. City of Dubuque ow By: Title: a &t, (it' 7\ Date / 1' , 20 I, Kavi n S. WI rnStahl , Certifythat Gus Psihoyos , who signed authorized to execute the same by virtue of a on the l9 t h day of Signed March I am the Clerk of the City, and that said Agreement for and on behalf of the City was duly formal Resolution duly passed and adopted by the City, Cit Jerk of Dub que, Iowa Department of Transportation: 2013 Date March 19 ,2013 By: Date , 20 Kent L. Ellis Local Systems Engineer, District 6 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP- 052 - 2(129)-- 9S- 31.docx Page 6 of 10 March 2013 EXHIBIT 1 General Agreement Provisions for use of Federal Highway Funds on Primary Highways As a condition of receiving Federal Highway funds, the Recipient shall comply with the following additional provisions: 1. The Recipient shall be responsible for including the project in the appropriate Regional Planning Affiliation (RPA) or Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The Recipient shall also ensure that the appropriate RPA or MPO, through their TIP submittal to the Department, includes the project in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). If the project is not included in the appropriate fiscal year of the STIP, Federal funds cannot be authorized. 2. Before beginning any work for which Federal funding reimbursement will be requested, the Recipient shall contact the Department to obtain the procedures necessary to secure FHWA authorization. The Recipient shall submit a written request for FHWA authorization to the Department. After reviewing the Recipient's request, the Department will forward the request to the FHWA for authorization and obligation of Federal funds. The Department will notify the Recipient when FHWA authorization is obtained. The cost of work performed prior to FHWA authorization will not be reimbursed with Federal funds. 3. The Recipient shall take the necessary actions to comply with applicable State and Federal laws and regulations. To assist the Recipient, the Department has provided guidance in the Federal -aid Project Development Guide (Guide) and the Instructional Memorandums to Local Public Agencies (I.M.$) that are referenced by the Guide. Both are available on -line at: http://www.iowadot.gov/local_systems/ publications /im/Ipa_ims.htm. The Recipient shall follow the applicable procedures and guidelines contained in the Guide and I.M.s in effect at the time project activities are conducted. 4. In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and associated subsequent nondiscrimination laws, regulations, and executive orders, the Recipient shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. In accordance with Iowa Code Chapter 216, the Recipient shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of race, color, creed, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, pregnancy, or disability. The Recipient agrees to comply with the requirements outlined in I.M. 1.070, Title VI and Nondiscrimination Requirements which includes the requirement to provide a copy of the Recipient's Title VI Plan or Agreement and Standard DOT Title VI Assurances to the Department. 5. The Recipient shall comply with the requirements of Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), and the associated Federal regulations that implement these laws, and the guidance provided in I.M. 1.080, ADA Requirements. When pedestrian facilities are constructed, reconstructed, or altered, the Recipient shall make such facilities compliant with the ADA and Section 504. 6. To the extent allowable by law, the Recipient agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the Department harmless from any action or liability arising out of the design, construction, maintenance, placement of traffic control devices, inspection, or use of this project. This agreement to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless applies to all aspects of the Department's application review and approval process, plan and construction reviews, and funding participation. 7. As required by 49 CFR 18.26, the Recipient is responsible for obtaining audits in accordance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S. C. 7501 -7507) and revised Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A -133. Subpart B of OMB Circular A -133 stipulates that non - Federal entities expending $500,000 or more in Federal awards in a year shall have a single or program - specific audit 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP-052-2(129)--9S-3 1. docx Page 7 of 10 March 2013 conducted for that year in accordance with the provision of that part. Auditee responsibilities are addressed in subpart C of OMB CircularA -133. The Federal funds provided by this agreement shall be reported on the appropriate Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) using the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number and title as shown on the first page of this agreement. If the Recipient will pay initial project costs and request reimbursement from the Department, the Recipient shall report this project on its SEFA. If the Department will pay initial project costs and then credit those accounts from which initial costs were paid, the Department will report this project on its SEFA. In this case, the Recipient shall not report this project on its SEFA 8. The Recipient shall supply the Department with all information by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency act of 2006 and 2 CFR Part 170. 9. The Recipient shall comply with the following Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) requirements: 1) The Recipient shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of any Department- assisted contract or in the administration of its DBE program or the requirements of 49 CFR Part 26. The Recipient shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of Department - assisted contracts. 2) The Recipient shall comply with the requirements of I.M. 3.710, DBE Guidelines. 3) The Department's DBE program, as required by 49 CFR Part 26 and as approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), is incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the Recipient of its failure to carry out its approved program, the Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and /or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.). 10. Termination of funds. Notwithstanding anything in this agreement to the contrary, and subject to the limitations set forth below, the Department shall have the right to terminate this agreement without penalty and without any advance notice as a result of any of the following: 1) The Federal government, legislature or governor fail in the sole opinion of the Department to appropriate funds sufficient to allow the Department to either meet its obligations under this agreement or to operate as required and to fulfill its obligations under this agreement; or 2) If funds are de- appropriated, reduced, not allocated, or receipt of funds is delayed, or if any funds or revenues needed by the Department to make any payment hereunder are insufficient or unavailable for any other reason as determined by the Department in its sole discretion; or 3) If the Department's authorization to conduct its business or engage in activities or operations related to the subject matter of this agreement is withdrawn or materially altered or modified. The Department shall provide the Recipient with written notice of termination pursuant to this section. 11. Certain utility relocation, alteration, adjustment, or removal costs may be eligible for Federal funding reimbursement in accordance with the FHWA rules applicable to the type of utility involved and Iowa Code Chapter 306A. If the Recipient desires Federal reimbursement of these costs, it shall submit a request for FHWA Authorization prior to beginning any utility relocation work, in accordance with the procedures outlined in I.M. 3.650, Federal -aid Participation in Utility Relocations. 12. If Federal funding is requested for in -house services, the Recipient shall follow the procedure outlined in I.M. 3.310, Federal -aid Participation in In -House Services. 13. If the Recipient desires to claim indirect costs under Federal awards, the Recipient shall prepare an indirect cost rate proposal and related documentation in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR 2013 -E -259 Dubuque TCSP - 052 - 2(129)-- 9S- 31.docx Page 8 of 10 March 2013 225. Before incurring costs for in -house services, such an indirect cost rate proposal shall be certified by the FHWA or the Federal agency providing the largest amount of Federal funds to the Recipient. 14. If the Recipient requests Federal funds for consultant services, the Recipient and the Consultant shall prepare a contract for consultant services in accordance with 23CFRPart 172. These regulations require a qualifications -based selection process. The Recipient shall follow the procedures for selecting and using consultants outlined in I.M. 3.305, Federal -aid Participation in Consultant Costs. 15. If Preliminary Engineering (PE) work is Federally funded, and if right -of -way acquisition for or actual construction of the road is not started by the close of the tenth fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the Federal funds were authorized, the Recipient shall repay to the Department an amount equal to the amount of Federal funds made available for such engineering. PE includes work that is part of the development of the PS &E for a construction project. This includes environmental studies and documents, preliminary design, and final design up through and including the preparation of bidding documents. PE does not include planning or other activities that are not intended to lead to a construction project. Examples include planning, conceptual, or feasibility studies. 16. The Recipient shall take the appropriate actions and prepare the necessary documents to fulfill the FHWA requirements for project environmental studies including historical /cultural reviews and location approval. The Recipient shall complete any mitigation agreed upon in the FHWA approval document. These procedures are set forth in I.M. 3.105, Concept Statement Instructions; 3.110, Environmental Data Sheet Instructions; 3.112, FHWA Environmental Concurrence Process; and 3.114, Cultural Resource Regulations. 17. If farmland is to be acquired, whether for use as project right -of -way or permanent easement, the Recipient shall follow the procedures in I.M. 3.120, Farmland Protection Policy Act Guidelines. 18. The Recipient shall obtain project permits and approvals, when necessary, from the Iowa Department of Cultural Affairs (State Historical Society of Iowa; State Historic Preservation Officer), Iowa Department of Natural Resources, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Department, or other agencies as required. The Recipient shall follow the procedures in I.M. 3.130, 404 Permit Process; 3.140, Storm Water Permits; 3.150, Highway Improvements in the Vicinity of Airports or Heliports; and 3.160, Asbestos Inspection, Removal and Notification Requirements. 19. In all contracts entered into by the Recipient, and all subcontracts, in connection with this project that exceed $100,000, the Recipient shall comply with the requirements of Section 114 of the Clean Air Act and Section 308 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and all their regulations and guidelines. In such contracts, the Recipient shall stipulate that any facility to be utilized in performance of or to benefit from this agreement is not listed on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) List of Violating Facilities or is under consideration to be listed. 20. If the Recipient is responsible for acquisition of the project right -of -way, it shall acquire the project right -of -way, whether lease, easement, or fee title, and shall provide relocation assistance benefits and payments in accordance with the procedures set forth in I.M. 3.605, Right -of -Way Acquisition, and the Department's Office of Right of Way Local Public Agency Manual. The Recipient shall contact the Department for assistance, as necessary, to ensure compliance with the required procedures, even if no Federal funds are used for right-of-Way activities. The Recipient shall obtain environmental concurrence before acquiring any needed right -of -way. With prior approval, hardship and protective buying is possible. If the Recipient requests Federal funding for right -of -way acquisition, the Recipient shall also obtain FHWA authorization before purchasing any needed right -of -way. 21. If the project right -of -way is Federally funded and if the actual construction is not undertaken by the close of the twentieth fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the Federal funds were authorized, the Recipient shall repay the amount of Federal funds reimbursed for right -of -way costs to the Department. 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP- 052 - 2(129)-- 9S- 31.docx Page 9 of 10 March 2013 22. If Federal funding is requested for construction performed by employees of the Recipient, the Recipient will follow the procedures outlined in I.M. 3.810, Federal -aid Construction by Local Agency Forces. 23. The non - Federal share of the project costs may include cash or third party non -cash contributions to the project. If the Recipient desires to use a third party non -cash contribution as credit toward the non - Federal share, the Recipient shall submit a request to the Department for review in accordance with I.M. 3.050, In -Kind Contributions. The Department will have sole authority to determine the value of the Recipient's non -cash contribution for the purposes of this agreement. 24. The Recipient shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, reports, and other evidence pertaining to costs incurred for the project. The Recipient shall also make these materials available at all reasonable times for inspection by the Department, FHWA, or any authorized representatives of the Federal Government. Copies of these materials shall be furnished by the Recipient if requested. Such documents shall be retained for at least 3 years from the date of FHWA approval of the final closure document. Upon receipt of FHWA approval of the final closure document, the Department will notify the Recipient of the record retention date. 25. The total funds collected by the Recipient for this project shall not exceed the total project costs. The total funds collected shall include any Federal or State funds received, and any special assessments made by the Recipient (exclusive of any associated interest or penalties), pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 384 (cities) or Chapter 311 (counties). The total project costs shall include all costs that can be directly attributed to the project. In the event that the total funds collected by the Recipient does exceed the total project costs, the Recipient shall either: 1) in the case of special assessments, refund to the assessed property owners the excess special assessments collected (including interest and penalties associated with the amount of the excess), or 2) refund to the Department all funds collected in excess of the total project costs (including interest and penalties associated with the amount of the excess) within 60 days of the receipt of any excess funds. In return, the Department will either credit reimbursement billings to the FHWA or credit the appropriate State fund account in the amount of refunds received from the Recipient. 2013- E- 259_Dubuque TCSP-052-2(129)--9S-3 1 .docx Page 10 of 10 Masterpiece on the Mississippi Dubuque bierd All-America City 1 2007 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: 9th, 10th, 11th, Elm and Pine Streets: One -Way to Two -Way Conversion DATE: July 10, 2012 City Engineer Gus Psihoyos recommends City Council approval of the conversion of 9th, 10th, 11th, Elm and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic. This conversion is instrumental in the City's development of the Intermodal Terminal and Parking Facility, the Historic Millwork District, and the Downtown Central Business District. There are businesses in this area that are impacted and City staff has done their best to address their concerns, but you will see that there are still outstanding issues. Engineering staff and IIW Engineers will do a presentation with detailed information. I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council approval. Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM:jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer Masterpiece on the Mississippi TO: Michael C Van Mil!igen, City Manager FROM: Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer Dubuque All-America City 11111 2007 SUBJECT: 9th 10th 11th Elm and Pine Street One -Way to Two -Way Conversion DATE: July 11, 2012 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memorandum is to seek City Council concurrence on the conversion of 9th, 10th 11th Elm and Pine streets from one -way to two -way traffic via the attached resolution BACKGROUND In October, 2010 Veenstra & Kimm completed a traffic study that indicated that 9th, 10th and 11th Streets can sufficiently handle the traffic volume if converted from a one -way to two -way traffic pattern Based on that recommendation, IIW, PC was selected in February, 2012, to design the improvements required for conversion from one -way to two -way and to provide a comprehensive analysis of the existing traffic signal timings in the Downtown Central Business District On April 2, 2012, IIW, PC (IIW) and the City Engineering Department held a Council work session that presented such topics as - Proposed US 52 routing and corridor improvements - Conversion of 9th, 10th 11th Elm and Pine Street from a one -way to two -way traffic - Improvements at the Kerper Boulevard, 9th Street, and 11th Street intersection The City has budgeted $1 ,725,000 in FY 2012 to make the necessary improvements for conversion from one -way to two -way streets The CIP number is 3602442 DISCUSSION The one- to two -way conversion of 9th, 10th 11th Elm and Pine Streets is instrumental in the City's development of its Intermodal Terminal and Parking Facility, the Historic Millwork District (HMD), and the Downtown Central Business District In 2009, the Cuningham Group of Minneapolis, MN in coordination with the City of Dubuque developed the Historic Millwork District Master Plan This master plan was adopted by the City Council in February 2009 and recommends the conversion of 9th, 10th and 11th Streets from one -way to two -way. The master plan recognizes the benefits of improving traffic interaction with the businesses in the HMD and the downtown business core. Two -way streets allow for improved access to businesses and the proposed 700 residential living units in the area. Many studies have shown that two -way streets promote multi -modal access to the areas served by the streets: creating improved pedestrian access, bicycle access, slowing vehicle traffic, and reducing confusion for infrequent visitors to the area. IIW is proposing the following changes: Current US 52 Routing Pattern (Exhibit A) - 9th Street and 11th Street: One -way between Central Avenue and Kerper Boulevard. - Pine Street and Elm Street: One -way between 9th Street and 11th Street. - E911 connector: One -way between 9th and 11th Street. Proposed US 52 Routing Pattern (Exhibit B) 9th Street and 11th Street: Two -way, with White Street added as part of the US 52 routing. Pine Street and Elm Street: Two -way. Partial elimination of the E911 corridor to serve the Intermodal Terminal and Parking Facility. Based on II1Ns traffic volume review for current year and future year 2040, the conversion of 9th 10th 11th Street, Elm Street, and Pine Street will provide the capacity to carry two -way traffic with the addition of turn lanes and traffic signal revisions. As noted in the attached letter, the Iowa Department of Transportation is willing to consider other traffic options around the proposed intermodal site. However, plan review is required prior to implementation. Exhibit 4.1 shows the conceptual layout of the intermodal transportation center with two - way traffic in place on 9th, 10th and 11th, Elm and Pine Streets. Traffic Signalization Based on the Two -Way Conversion of 9th Street, 11th Street, Elm Street and Pine Street IIW and their sub - consultant, Brown Traffic Control Products, have explored two alternate traffic routing plans for the two way conversions. Alternate A: Converts 9th Street, 10th, 11th Street (east of Central), Elm Street and Pine Street to two -way operation and maintains the existing traffic routing. Alternate B: Changes the traffic routing plan to eliminate the jog to 10t" Street and maintains traffic on 11th Street to Bluff Street. With the additional signalization on 11th Street, traffic will increase past the Carnegie -Stout Public Library. It is recommended that the traffic progression of Alternate A be selected. Vehicle Turning Movement As part of the conversion, IIW studied the impact of vehicular turning movements. The following lane configurations are proposed: 9th Street at Central and White Streets (Exhibits 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4) - Stop bar adjustments to avoid truck -car conflict on turn movements. - Installation of additional "Stop Here on Red" signs to remind drivers where to stop. - Removal of parking spaces. 11th Street at Central and White Streets (Exhibits 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4) Stop bar adjustments to avoid truck -car conflict on turn movements. Installation of additional "Stop Here on Red" signs to remind drivers where to stop. Removal of parking spaces. Reconstruction of the northeast corner of 11th & White Street to allow truck right - hand turn movement. Spahn & Rose Lumber Company expressed concerns about how their trucks will stage along 11 th street prior to entering their yard. Currently the trucks stage along the south side of the street. After the conversion of 11 th street to two -way traffic, their trucks will need to stage on the north side of the street in the parking lane and make turns into their yard. Trucks will then exit and travel east on 11th Street. This change, however, will require modifications to their driveway and the chain link fence which would be at the City's expense. See exhibit EX 1.1. 10th Street IIW and City of Dubuque Engineering analyzed the turn movements onto 1 0th street from both White Street and Central Avenue. 10th Street is not designed as a truck corridor. Trucks will make deliveries to the downtown area as they always have done, using alternate routes that can accommodate their truck turning movements. Kerper Boulevard /9th Street /11th Street Intersection During the final design of the one- to two -way street conversion, IIW and Engineering staff will review means to improve the connectivity within this corridor. Current options include a roundabout or a traditional T- intersection where 9th and 11th would intersect. Public Input Process Engineering staff and IIW held an open house in April 2012 for the public to provide comments on the proposal to go from one -way to two -way streets. Approximately 15 people attended the meeting. The attendees were mostly supportive of the conversion of the streets from one -way to two -way. • Spahn & Rose Engineering staff and IIW have met with Spahn & Rose representatives multiple times to discuss the project. Spahn & Rose is not supportive of two -way traffic on 11th street. They have operational concerns regarding access to their property by trucks, safety, and parking. Engineering staff shared that a significant amount of new housing will be developing near their store in the near future. A lot of that traffic will be pedestrians. Two -way streets will improve accessibility to the store and yard for all customers. Spahn and Rose indicated that if 11th street becomes two -way, they want some accommodations made for their business. Below is a list of their requests and City staff responses to the request: Delay Implementation of the two -way street conversion until Spahn and Rose can relocate to a new site. The street conversion would not occur until 2014 due to the project development timeline required for the Intermodal Terminal. Create a loading zone area on the north side of 11th Street from our access driveway east to Elm St. to allow space for our supplier trucks to wait until they can be unloaded in our lot. We would suggest this be effective on weekdays from 6AM -6PM. Currently trucks stage along the south side of the street. After the conversion of 11th street to two -way traffic, their trucks will need to stage on the north side of the street in the parking lane and make turns into their yard. Trucks will then exit and travel east or west on 11th Street. Engineering and Parking are not opposed to this. Eliminate all of the parking meters on the south side of 11th Street to replace the free parking lost by creating the loading zone. Eliminating the parking meters in this area is not recommended. The meters encourage turnover of parking and allow customers to park for Spahn & Rose and future businesses in the area. The 10th street parking ramp is 3 blocks away. The new intermodal parking ramp will be two blocks away. The City is continually looking for parking solutions in the Millwork District. The City is planning to create 562 new spaces which would include the Intermodal ramp. The Parking Division is also evaluating the use and location of 10 hour meters in this area. Design and pay for an acceptable modification that allows trucks to access our property without forcing us to lose storage space. This will include reinforcing the concrete and curb work for the entrance as well as installing a new sliding gate for the truck entrance. The staging of trucks on the north side of the street is required with two -way streets. This change, however, will require modifications to their driveway and the chain link fence which would be at the City's expense. See exhibit EX 1.1. As can be seen in the exhibit, there will be some loss of storage space in the yard. It is estimated that 20 feet of additional space will be needed for the entrance widening and corresponding gate. Eliminate an appropriate number of parking spaces on 12th Street to allow our trucks to safely exit our property via the north gate of our lot. Engineering will need to evaluate the removal of parking in this area. There are residential properties nearby that do not have off - street parking. Install signage or flashing lights to alert 11th St. traffic of truck and forklift traffic from Jackson St. Engineering supports the installation of special signage to alert 11th traffic regarding special equipment (forklifts, etc) crossing the street. Cooperation from law enforcement. The City will ensure Police provide appropriate enforcement for all users in this area. The city must be aware that our supplier trucks also will continue to back across 11th Street from Washington to access the loading dock on our leased warehouse on the south side of 11th Street. During the development of the HMD Complete Streets project, the City made modifications to the pavement and curbs on Washington Street to accommodate Spahn & Rose's use of this loading dock. The City will work with Spahn and Rose on appropriate signage to accommodate this activity. • Cue Masters (9th & Central) The owner of Cue Masters Billiards, Mr. Bill Cramer contacted the City opposing the project. His building is located on the corner of 9th and Central. In exhibit 2.1 the proposed truck turning movements are going to require 3 parking spaces to be removed from the street. Mr. Cramer previously lost parking across Central Avenue by the Fire Station. Those parking spots are utilized for public safety vehicles. Mr. Cramer does not feel the 10th street parking ramp is a viable alternative. The 10th street ramp is essentially across the street from Cue Master's and has metered spaces to accommodate customers. The rates on these meters are the same as if the vehicle was on the street. • 1104 White Street Engineering staff were contacted by Mr. Mike Kelley. Mr. Kelley is the owner of an apartment building at 1104 White. He is opposed to the loss of parking near his building. This building is on the corner of 11th and White. In exhibit 3.3 the proposed truck turning movements are going to require 3 -4 parking places be removed from the street. Mr. Kelley has some off street parking but not enough for all of his tenants. There is parking on White Street but that is shared with other businesses and residences in the area and may not always be available for his tenants. The 10th street parking ramp is 3 blocks away. The new intermodal parking ramp will be two blocks away. The City is continually looking for parking solutions in the Millwork District. The City plans to create 562 new spaces in the HMD. This would include the Intermodal parking ramp. • Dubuque Main Street & Major Warehouse Property Owners City staff met with Dubuque Main Street and the Millwork District property owners on the conversion of the streets to two -way. They are very supportive of two -way streets. The attached paper supporting two -way streets from the Urban Street Symposium of the Transportation Research Board also supports the project. Future Meter District Through the planning of the Historic Millwork District, ongoing discussions with property owners and developers regarding managing valuable parking space with the installation of parking meters has occurred. This meter district expansion will create the parking turn -over that is so critical to retail success in the downtown area. Throughout these discussions, the need for the meter district expansion has been well received, and for the most part, is one of the best ways to manage the parking spaces. A recommendation detailing the expanded district will be on a future council agenda. The proposed expansion of the Downtown Meter District would include White Street from 5th Street to 11th Street on both sides, 8th Street both sides from White Street to Washington, 9th Street both sides from White Street to Elm Street, 10th Street both sides from White Street to Elm Street, 11th Street both sides from White Street to Elm Street, Jackson Street both sides from 8th Street to 11th Street, and Washington Street both sides from 8th Street to 11th Street. Intermodal Transportation Center Impact If 9th and 11th street between Central Avenue and Kerper Boulevard do not get converted to two -way streets, the Intermodal Transportation Center Terminal building will be negatively affected. Exhibit 4.0 shows the Intermodal site and the current Elm Street Connector shaded. The Iowa DOT has informed the City that the Elm Street Connector has to remain in its current alignment if 9th and 11th Streets remain one -way. This greatly impacts the available room for the terminal building and bus parking along the terminal. With the streets remaining one -way, the design of the intermodal terminal building will undoubtedly require higher architectural fees to design the structure. The Federal Transit Administration would have to review and approve the change in the design. The $8 million dollar grant may be at risk with a terminal site layout change. RECOMMENDATION Engineering recommends that the City Council approve the conversion of 9tH 1 0th 11tH Elm and Pine Streets to two -way traffic. BUDGET IMPACT The preliminary estimate for these conversions is $1.725 million. A more refined estimate will developed through the preliminary and final design process. This expense will be funded through the 1 way to 2 way conversion capital improvement project fund (CIP 3602442). This cost does not cover the conversion of the 9th Street 11th street and Kerper Boulevard intersection into a roundabout. ACTION TO BE TAKEN The City Council is requested to adopt the attached resolution approving the conversion of 9th, loth, 11 ch Elm and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic. Prepared by Jon Dienst, P.E. cc: Julie Neebel, IIW, PC Jenny Larson, Budget Director Don Vogt, Public Works Director John Klostermann, Street & Sewer Maintenance Supervisor David Ness, Civil Engineer II Duane Richter, Engineering Technician RESOLUTION NO. 197 -12 APPROVING THE CONVERSION OF NINTH, TENTH, ELEVENTH, ELM AND PINE STREETS FROM ONE -WAY TO TWO -WAY TRAFFIC Whereas, the conversion of Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, EIm and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic is instrumental to the City of Dubuque, Iowa's development of its Intermodal Transportation Terminal and Parking Facility, the Historic Millwork District and the Downtown Central Business District, and such conversion is part of the Historic Millwork District Master Plan; and Whereas, a traffic study of Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, EIm and Pine Streets indicates that such streets can sufficiently handle the traffic volume if converted from a one -way to a two -way traffic pattern; and Whereas, improvements necessary for the conversion of Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, EIm and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic flow have been designed, and a comprehensive analysis of the existing traffic signal timing in the Downtown Central Business District has been performed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBUQUE, IOWA: Section 1. Subject to the adoption of required amendments to the City of Dubuque Code of Ordinances, the conversation of Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, EIm and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic is hereby approved. Section 2. The City Attorney is directed to prepare the required amendments to the City of Dubuque Code of Ordinances for consideration by the City Council. Passed, approved and adopted thisl6 th day of Jul , 2012. Attest: Kevin S Firnstahl, City Cle Roy uol, Mayor 4C� Iowa Department of Transportation 4+ District 6 Office 319 -364 -0235 430 Sixteenth Avenue SW FAX: 319 -364 -9614 Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 sam.shea @dot.iowa.gov Ref: STP -U -2100()- -70 -31 Jon Dienst, PE City of Dubuque 50 West 13th Street Dubuque, Iowa 52001 SUBJECT US Hwy 52 and Intermodal Transportation Facility Dear Mr Dienst It is our understanding that the City of Dubuque would like the Iowa DOT to consider additional options for traffic on US Highway 52 (9th and 11th Streets) in the "Millwork District," especially relating to the Intermodal Transportation Facility (ITF) As you may recall, last year the City made a similar request regarding this route (reso #191 -11, dated June 6th 2011) The DOT will require the same due diligence that the City provided for the previous request for any future requests This would likely include, but is not limited to, a formal resolution approved by City Council making the request, a proposed site plan demonstrating accesses to the new ITF site as well as all other access points along the affected highway area, a traffic impact study to include current and 20 year future forecast traffic, and maintenance estimates for the proposed highway changes As with the previous request, Iowa DOT staff will perform a thorough review of any new proposal Depending on staffing, workload, and coordination between our staffs and consultants, I would anticipate the review to take approximately the same amount of time as your previous request If you have further questions on this matter please contact me at 319-286-4907, or by email at sam shea@dot Iowa Rov Sincerely, Sam J Shea, Transportation Planner District 6 / Davenport Area CC Jim Schnoebelen, District Engineer Ken Yanna, Asst District Engineer Craig Markley, Office of Systems Planning Tim Simodynes, Office of Traffic & Safety Art Gourley, District Staff Engineer (Dyersville) EXISTING 1-0" ROUTING ■ EXISTING US 62 ROUTING r7 aim im o o 4. EXISTING ONE WAY TRAFFIC FLOWS > 1 iiw EXISTING ONE WAY TRAFFIC FLOWS exiaeigi- � PROPOSED US 52 ROUT(NO i2 la WWI 51 4 EXISTING ONE WAY TRAFFIC FLOWS <4. PROPOSED TWO WAY TRAFFIC FLOWS STAR gTAR ERE MODIFIED TRAFFIC FLOWS USING 9TH STREET AS HWY 52 ROUTING AND PINE STREET AS '70" US 61/151 AND "TO" US 52 ELM ST (n x / 0 ECO CRtr(NTU SCALE NFEET FFO ti CJv w J 1 WHITE ST CENT z HEEB ST LL LL 3 Ezu, AVE CITY HALL N. MAIN ST • • ELLIS ST 7// �rN k cc 0 'i I LO UST ST ( • EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ONE WAY CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROGRESSION COLOR IDENTIFIES SYSTEM MEMBERS TWO WAY CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROGRESSION COLOR IDENTIFIES SYSTEM MEMBERS GROVE TERRACE �4 CITY OF DUBUQUE EXISTING DOWNTOWN SIGNAL INSTALLATIONS • . GEOMETRY ALTERNATE 1 (n (c LOCUST T BLUFF ciF•v�o� ug,u,�uut uu twagw TrulFlc Products. Inc. lil AFlY6 lflOY1lIOA, I!(XY11P611 f(AN(I J IIW ARCHITECTURE CM. ENGNEERNG CaR51101.IC71. EFHVCES 1.01100010010. ENGNEFIR :G NGNcoMMY!G u ENGN EEJ G NlS i Pp TAtNENGNEERNG 15.00 48.00 NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWNG MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 4.00 19.50 WB -62 Tractor Width Trailer Width Tractor Track Trailer Track feet : 8.00 : 8.50 8.00 8.50 Lock to Lock Time Steering Angle Articulating Angle 0 IW, P C •• IIW ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING MEGRTW EXPERTISESOLHTCNS ) COPYRIGHT 2012 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF IIW, P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF IIW, P C z WO • ce 7 Z Ho W a }Q eE C > Z W ZOco < (") o W m II- }Q w Z a) o C 0] 0 U mu. AUTOTURN EXHIBIT P \10\041\041 -05 \DRAWINCS\CIVIL\10041- 05_SPAHN AND ROSE DETAILDWC 6/12/2012 11 46 AM CODY AUSTIN °dSIII Sheet No EX. 1.1 Project No 10041 -05 NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 19 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUC 15.00 X 530 EXISTING CONDITION STOP HERE ON RED 3.00 —0.00 R1 0-6 24" X 36" 4 00 19 50 WB -67 G0M SP`-- PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING HWY 52 ROUTING E - \S1\ LEGEND EXISTING CONDITION NOTES • 1 00 WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 EXISTING — DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY I IW, P C • • IIW ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES EN', .IRONMENT AL ENGINEERING LAND SUP,' /E'i ING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING INIEGWIY ERPERIISESCUIf IONS .. n,,i » • 44JI [C LP'RI HT 2012 ALL RIGHTS PE EP jED THESEC UMENTSHAVE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFIC ALL'i FOP THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT NIA'i BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF IRA P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF 11Y, P C I-z WO W�/ (n LL z (1) U 00 HU�� >_ z ❑ — J Lu Z < �F Hi-w w°2 Q= w z Imo P \10\ 041\ 041 -05 \DRAWINGS \CIL1L \10041- 05_AUTO- TURN_WEST DWG 6/12/2012 11 45 AM CODY AUSTIN Em IL E V COUNCIL REVIEW Sheet No r EX. z.1 Project No 10041 -05 _.�mllllll��lllluw,.. NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED NON- TYPICAL TRUCK MOVEMENT CAN BE COMPLETED WITHOUT CURB ENCROACHMENT I • • 0 0 S<ER� P C� M FRCS , 0 PR�p OS�D 0E25`1". a a IIW ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING IRIECRITYEXPER118ESOWTK S © COPYRIGHT2012 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF IIW, P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF IIW, P C o- PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING 15 00 53 00 E��S�1NG NOTES WATCH FOR TURNING TRUCKS • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 4.00 19.50 WB -67 LEGEND EXISTING DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY 0 qo 0 z 0 1- U w wm Z w J a� F 0 WD U 0 CDz 1- V P \10\ 0411,041- 05\DRAWINGS \CIVI0\10041- 05_AUTO- TURN_WEST DWG 6/12/2012 11 45 AM CODY AUSTIN COUNCIL REVIEW 1 0 Sheet No r EX. 2.2 Project No 10041 -05 _ .11111lll11lllluw,.. NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 15.00 53.00 STOP HERE ON RED R10 -6 24" X 36" RECONSTRUCT CORNER CONVERT FROM PAVERS TO CONCRETE 400 1950 WB -67 .to ANO S_GO ROs- 403- G� PRO? os�� ‘1,1,\-`1" cn 0 0 0 NOTES EXISTING CONDITION LEGEND 0 • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 EXISTING — DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY I IW, P C • • IIW ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING INTEGRITY oCPERnsESCLUnons © COPYRIGHT 2012 ALL RIGHTS RESER`, /ED THESE Doc MEETS HA)iE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFIC.ALL`i FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY I10 PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MA/ BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED 10 ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF 1100, PC ALL INFORMATION PI THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY 0011:00, P c I-z WO U �J/ 7) LO L.1_ V J z =O H U Q O I— I— I-1-1 W O- �z CD O P \10\ 041\ 041 -05 \DRAWINGS \CI11L \10041- 05_ADTD- IURN_WEST DWG 6/12/2012 11 45 4M CODY 400116 V 0 COUNCIL REVIEW Sheet No f EX. 2.3 Protect No 10041 -05 _ .11111lll11lllluw,.. NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 15 00 53 00 4 00 19.50 WB -67 45.50 ANO 5�G0 RO�� 403- 1111 P C • • RECONSTRUCT CORNER R���G 0• 11W ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONTTPUCTION CEPVICES Ell IRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND CURVED INN MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING I NIEGRRY ERPERTISESOWf IONS .. 4411 t.) COPYRIGHT 2012. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THESE DOCUMENTS HA :GiE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF 11W, P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT 1S CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF 11W, P C G� PROP oSEo 0 0 ® 0 MOVEMENT THAT SHOULD NOT OCCUR VERY OFTEN LEGEND EXISTING ---= DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY NOTES 0 PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH (Sz 11TH ST ARE US 52 H- V P \10 \041\ 041- 05 \DRA'MNGS \CIVIL \10041- 05_AUTO- TURN_WEST DWG 6/12/2012 11 45 AM CODY AUSTIN 0 COUNCIL REVIEW Sheet No EX. 2.4 Project No 10041 -05 _.�mllllll��lllluw,.. NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 15 00 53 00 4.00 19 50 WB -67 0"\c'" „,s STOP HERE ON RED 0Oo D- 5 c,Noon R10 -6 24" X 36" I1 0 - .11•11111101, —J !iiiiiIi]11I PROP OS�D NOTES • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES U552 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 LEGEND PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING EXISTING DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY IWPC • • IIW ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LANG SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING IRIECRIIYEXPERI13ESOWTK S © COPYRIGHT2012 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF IIW, P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF IIW, P C WO W Fz �jo U ZW =O0) �Uw� >zw a Z Z��� < Io z1 U a w0a �Z Irno P \10\ 041\ 041- 05 \DRA'MNGS \CIL1L \10041- 05_AUTO- 1URN_WEST DWG 6/12/2012 11 45 AM CODY AUSTIN 0 0, 0 H 0 co 0 COUNCIL REVIEW 0 0 ce Sheet No r EX. 3.1 Project No 10041 -05 _.�mllllll��lllluw,.. NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 15 00 53 00 4.00 19 50 WB -67 0 EXISTING CONDITION NOT A COMMON MOVEMENT SINCE ALL STOP SIGNS AFTER THIS INTERSECTION °"' GO�(S STOP HERE ON RED R10 -6 24" X 36" n 6 00? °s'-° NOTES • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING EXISTING CONDITION LEGEND EXISTING — DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY IWPC • • IIW ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING IRIECRIIYEXPERI13ESOWTK S © COPYRIGHT2012 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THESE DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF IIW, P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF IIW, P C WO UJ fY �jo U ZW =00) H 0 > I- m >zw J Z Z0 < Io Z 1- i ~ U a w0a Q� �Z I0) 0 P \10\ 041\ 041- 05 \DRA'MNGS \CIL1L \10041- 05_AUTO- 1URN_WESTDWG 6/12/2012 11 46 AM CODY AUSTIN C km 0 V 0 o COUNCIL REVIEW 0 ce Sheet No r EX. 3.2 Project No 10041 -05 �InlIIIIIIIIIi NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 15.00 u_,. Zoo 7 © i 53.00 45.50 4 00 19 50 WB -67 0 G PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING E`AS -\\ �/ 5055 P�tO NOTES • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 LEGEND EXISTING ; DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY 111/11 P C • • 11W ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING INTEGRITY ESPEAATISESOLUTIONS [C,1 C OPYR IG HT 2012 ALL RIGHTS' RESER`..ED THESE DOCUMENTS HA'...E SEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT IOA`T BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANN' FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF II'W, PC ALL INFORRIATIOIV IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF I I'Ni, P C �z W0 W ) L N LL_ L 1- z W r 0 � `. i z 20w o r >- w < z w ❑ wz Z 0 Q� =o HI- 0 W1-a O Z a7 P \10\ 041\ 041- 05 \ORAWNGS \CIVIL \10041- 05_ANTO- IURN_WEST OWG 0/12/2012 11 46 AM CODY 000110 2 U u. 0 a 0 2 I 0 a V a COUNCIL REVIEW fi I Sheet No EX. 3.3 Pro ect No 10041 -05 _ .11111lll11lllluw,.. NORTH HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 10 20 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED 15.00 53.00 45.50 0 EXISTING CONDITION G 4 00 19 50 WB -67 8 PROPOSED PAVEMENT MARKING O- 1 SSG E � GOO S PROP OS�D A so-5 o"cO 3P�G�R EXISTING CONDITION — NOT A COMMON MOVEMENT SINCE ALL STOP SIGNS AFTER CENTRAL AVENUE INTERSECTION G A\- PGO)GO. NOTES • IF TWO WAY, 9TH STREET BECOMES US52 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS • 11TH STREET BECOMES A LOCAL STREET • BOTH CENTRAL AND WHITE STREET BETWEEN 9TH & 11TH ST ARE US 52 LEGEND EXISTING ; DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC CENTER OF ROADWAY W,PC •• 11W ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONTTPUCTION SERVICES EN`e'IRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING I NIEGRRY ERPERIISESCUIf IONS 4411 © COPYRIGHT 2012 ALL RIGHTS' RESERVED THESE DOCUMENTS' HAVE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAC BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF II'W, P C ALL INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF IIW, P C �z TWO LL � W 0 z z I o I O r >- w m <zw ZOL w Q� =o HI- L-I I- a > _ w z Ia) 0 P \10 \041\ 041- 05 \DRA'MNGS \CIVIL \10041- 05_AUTO- IURN_WESTDWG 6/12/2012 11 46 AM CODY AUSTIN H- V sz sz COUNCIL REVIEW re Sheet No EX. 3.4 Project No 10041 -05 11 ..... 6 ♦ ♦ - \♦•' ♦ \ � T • _ , . *,, 0 t 0% , , ' ' C ) c,,?' . ' 4 tee * — 0-7 �E`�j 1 A NP�� / _� ♦ ♦••` ,:i \. ♦ ♦ ♦ \♦ , % I \ \ ® ', % % ',, tom: ,.�,�!►�i .A . ♦: %•'.e %' : %.•,.•o• ♦,• �� �� \\• , \ , , \ \ 1 0 :\zm ; : \ �a 1 j ,, \ - * ..- „ $ \ , .- L, Ai , V' J Nil 11'4 Pi 11 PSPNP�t \ \ NO- ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 800.556.4491 ± 4 t 4,-,,.., ±±± � / 6 �i \ 0 ___------ P NPt ,„,0 ,,,a . \ C) ® �. _ =y t t t ‘ \ r • \ • - -,+ t t t t ;\i\\\V ` �” �O V # // \ + +� +�r+ / Q / � ° + + + + \; ` Q �- \ �, _/ /<� ���� \ y� t + + + + + + + ++ ,:- ` /� �� Z. _ �' , + + + + ,, a__ � �j P / + + + + �N\ \ .� – % t /.+' 0 /� ,,,\0 / / / PREPARED SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY. NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED PROPERTY OF IIW, P.C. a *, ± t\\ tttt�, _,, ,, . \ \ _ - _ \ / / u E c '% Pk' 4. l',,,, 10 CD,'`' 117 w , ' \ /r0' / �� / + + + t \ + \ / + \ = �0 / G -- • :. / ++ + + + / \ + + + + + + + +,,, + + + � t � / � � + �+ + + + � � . \• � �- \} + . , ______- tttt� . ---,./ ± + ± ± --- , ,+ , , / /� ��� --"v ': t t , r / . tr:/+++++ + Z' 1 r, • t t t + a - �� - �s t / + iiiiiiivv PSP \ , X11 E 9TH & 11TH STREET ONE -WAY TO TWO -WAY CONVERSION EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS CITY OF DUBUQUE P: \10\ 041\ 041 -05\ DRAWINGS\ CIVIL\ 10041- 05_TOPO- BASE_INTERMODAL.DWG 7/9/2012 2: 27 PM RYAN BENJEGERDES ■ itii :\1 i 4--- - SC- ! OO — ?� +� �► , .� i�. +tom+ + / o t'::' 5 * .., ,,, -, + ± ± . . ' ( - . \\> V) A 0 r i,:r1 ± 0 ,-,", ti\ ± ± . ' ' .. 4 ,‘, .,• ± ± ot _ i t t /0'4 ',' �' \ .�0 + + \/ MAIN RELOCATION 90; t t tt ± ± ± \ ®/ / `' POSSIBLE FORCE .....- ■.\\::,v4 ra .� Ali 1 ilk LARGE STORM + - - /,° SEWER PIPES „ o 0/ _ ,� ■ \\ Av, Itipi 44 1 1 ``I , ' "3 V LEGEND: \ 2 m .., iii e" .1-7 BRIDGE SUPPORTS (TYP) •` ::'1' <,, /j / o �:� 0 / __ = > PROPOSED TRAFFIC FLOW o Q 0 _ °; -� �' , "-� 4, o �o / C- = � EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOW \ � 0 / EDGE OF BRIDGE Project Mgr: NEEBEL Drawn By: Issued For Bidding: Issued For Constru COUNCIL REVIEW Description EXISTING ROAD � VO41 -, _ elb / IN FEET C • ft ❑ ❑ \ EEO E \ gOX \ \/\ + + + + + + ++ tttt + + + + t t t t EXISTING PAVEMENT TO BE REMOVED o — — \ PROPERTY LINES / RIGHT OF WAY ° ' \ \ HORIZONTAL SCALE GAS LINES \ Sheet No:f , G o 40 80 0, 4 , . 4.0 o1\�y O STORM SEWER MANHOLE DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED , \ \ \ . Project No: 10041 -05 BLDG 6 C (TALL HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 DRAWING MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BRICK SLOG GM GUT -71°1 EL 50539 2 CAS TORS SqN MH RIM 80776 FL 507 05 SW SAN MR RIM 006 27 FL 59712 METAL BLDG AS ONO STAIRS METAL STAIRS IIIII• ASPHALT 2 GAS METERS ASPHALT ELM ST BM cur °x° ON ELEC MH RIM EL 60903 TERMINAL BUILDING 0 1RANSM15900 POLE S SAN MN RIM 60984 FL 59791 SW FL 598 02 NE • 95 TOTAL PARKING SPACES LEGEND GAS ° PENT PIPE Crr- c=1> DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC RF IIW, PC 11W ARCHITECTURE CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING LANG SURVEYING MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING INTEti1JTY EXPERT SESOLUTENs ( C O PYR IG HT 2012 ALL RIGHTS RESER`,,ED THESE DOCUIOIENTS HA.iE BEEN PREPARED SPECIFIC aLLY FOP THIS PROJECT ONLY IVO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF ILNi, P C ALL INFORMATIDIJ IIV THIS DOCUMENT IS CONSIDERED PROPERTY OF I I'W, P C �z �UJO>_ zi- =O1 H o r O aka z0z H H w0 zw Ia)0 P \10\ 041 \041 -05 \DRAWINGS \CIVIL \10041- 05_ZZ- O- SHEETS_ELM STUWG 0/12/2012 11 46 AM CODY AUSTIN C 2 g V(� CO LL 0 O_ 3 - :2 Ea N LDD C O LL C -C 4 V COUNCIL REVIEW Sheet No Jr EX. 4.1 Pro ect No 10041 -05 Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks? G. WADE WALKER WALTER M. KULASH BRIAN T. McHUGH Glatting Jackson KercherAnglin Lopez Rinehart, Inc. 33 East Pine Street Orlando, FL 32801 ABSTRACT As many communities are in the process of revitalizing their downtowns, a common issue is the prevalence of intricate and often confusing one -way street networks. This paper provides a comparison of one -way versus two -way street systems for downtowns and presents an evaluation methodology for considering two -way conversion. The analysis gives equal weight to all modes of travel and includes the non - regular visitor to downtown. Motorist analysis factors include mobility, vehicle miles of travel (VMT), number of turning movements, travel time, vehicle capacity, and parking supply. Pedestrian factors analyzed are number and severity of pedestrian/vehicle crossing conflicts. Direction and symmetry of routes comprise the transit analysis factors, and retail factors measure the visibility of street front locations. INTRODUCTION Ever since the explosion of automobile use that occurred after WWII, people have moved their residences further and further from downtown centers, out into new suburban communities. With this exodus came a daily travel ritual in which suburbanites in motor vehicles behave as tides do, placing a tremendous strain on the downtown street network. The historical response to this strain has been to improve the efficiency of moving vehicles into and out of the city at all costs, without considering other system users. We now understand that downtowns that operate predominantly as a place of work and clear out in the evening are the ones most often struggling to foster new development and business ventures. The longstanding mantra to seek the greatest speed by which commuter motorists can flee the city has accelerated the downtown deterioration process. The sad results are streets congested with fast - moving automobiles and barren of lively pedestrian, cultural, or commercial activity after the mad evening exodus. As many communities are in the process of revitalizing their downtowns, a common issue is the prevalence of intricate and often confusing one -way street networks. This legacy of one -way streets can be traced back to when the streets' sole mission was to move traffic into and out of the downtown employment center as quickly as possible. An emerging role of downtown as a cultural and entertainment center is now challenging the F -2 / 1 F -2 / 2 TRB Circular E -0019: Urban Street Symposium embedded mindset that the primary purpose of streets is the unequivocal movement of commuter automobile traffic. HOW WE GOT HERE: A BRIEF HISTORY OF ONE -WAY NETWORKS One -way streets in downtowns were not an overnight occurrence; rather, their proliferation was the result of a series of events that occurred over a number of years. The development of one -way downtown networks can be traced through four very distinct periods of evolution. The Pre - Freeway Era encompasses the time from prior to the development of the automobile to just after the conclusion of World War II. Cities were at the height of their development, and downtowns not only served as the seat of the local governments, but were also the hub of all social, civic, and cultural activity within the surrounding region. Downtown streets were home to not only motor vehicles, but also streetcars, trolleys, buses, and most importantly, people. Movement of each of these travel modes was equally balanced, with cars and pedestrians coexisting peacefully in a controlled, slow - speed environment. Retail business activity was at an all -time high, with most goods and services available in the core of the downtown. It is important to note that during this era most downtown workers did not commute great distances; rather, most lived within 2 to 5 miles of their downtown jobs. Suburbs had not yet been invented, as the transportation facilities of the day did not support long commute distances. However, all this was about to change, in the name of progress. America learned several important lessons during the course of World War II. Perhaps one of the most profound was the example that Nazi Germany provided through its impressive system of limited- access highways, by which expedient movement of troops and goods across the country was possible. With the passage of the Federal Highway Act of 1956, the Freeway Proliferation Era had begun. The construction of the freeways did exact many benefits for commerce; however, it also opened the door for downtown workers to move farther from their place of work. As downtown workers began to seek out less expensive, more desirable housing in the suburbs, the mode balance on downtown roadways that had been prevalent for many years began to shift toward facilitating the speedy entrance and exodus of commuters. Downtown streets began to be converted to one -way travel to facilitate this expedient movement into the city in the morning and out in the afternoon. As downtown workers continued the flight to the suburbs, providers of goods and services soon followed. Small downtown shops were recreated in the suburbs as regional shopping malls, supermarkets, and discount stores. Workers no longer patronized the small shops downtown since they could fill their needs closer to home, often at lower prices. Many of the small, family -owned businesses that had been located downtown for years either moved to the suburbs with their market or succumbed to closure as the market dwindled. This Post - Freeway Era reached its peak in the 1980s, when even traditional downtown corporate offices sought out the cheaper land in the suburbs. Many formerly strong downtowns were reduced to blighted, empty streets and boarded -up storefronts, devoid of life after 6 pm. Walker, Kulash, and McHugh F -2 / 3 Downtowns have seen a resurgence, beginning in the 1990s, as communities began to rediscover the attraction of the downtown as a location. Most downtowns never lost the designation of the cultural and governmental hub of their community; however, the ability of the downtowns to adapt to a new role as entertainment centers has aided in their comeback during this, the Reemerging Era. Many people are returning to downtowns as residents and workers now seek to escape the outlying suburbs and office parks. Since most suburban developments rely on one or two major arterial roadways, the traffic impacts associated with these areas have become much worse than ever imagined in the downtown, with its well- defined street network grid. As people return to downtown, there has been a plea for a rebalancing of downtown roadways, to make them safer and friendlier again for all modes of travel. It is in this context that many cities are contemplating the conversion of one -way streets to two -way travel. CONFLICTING OPINIONS The return of one -way downtown street networks to two -way travel is a relatively new phenomenon associated with downtown revitalizations. Opinions about the feasibility of two -way conversions vary widely, according to the interest group polled. Three of the most prevalent groups in communities that are investigating the possibility of two -way conversion are discussed in the following paragraphs. A Traffic Engineer's Perspective For many years, traffic engineers were mandated to "move as much traffic as possible, as quickly as possible," often resulting in degradation of movement for other modes of travel. The unequivocal movement of the motor vehicle through a downtown network was of paramount concern; all other modes of travel took a back seat. Effectiveness of the network was measured by the amount of delay a motorist would encounter on a given street segment or intersection during either the morning or afternoon peak hours. Given this context, one -way streets do make seihse; the Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook reports that the conversion toway operation generally increases capacity by about 10 to 20 percent. The case is also often made that one -way streets help facilitate good signal progression through a downtown network. One -way streets also offer the opportunity to control their traffic flow at signalized intersection approaches by a single signal phase, freeing up green time for intersecting street movements. One -way streets also have fewer conflicting turning movements at their intersections, reducing the chance for a through vehicle to encounter a turning vehicle. Finally, curbside activity such as service vehicle loading and unloading is less disruptive to the traffic flow on a one - way street, where only one travel lane is usually blocked by this activity. In traffic engineering circles, however, the operational disadvantages associated with one -way streets are becoming increasingly recognized. The system often forces drivers to follow out -of- direction routes to their destinations, causing an increase in both the number of turning movements required and vehicle miles of travel (VMT). The direct result of this recirculation is an increase in traffic volumes on a given segment or intersection within a one -way system, with a corresponding degradation in air quality within the downtown. F -2 / 4 TRB Circular E -0019: Urban Street Symposium Signal progression can often be maintained on two -way streets to favor the peak direction movement during the morning and afternoon peak hours with minimal effect on through- vehicle delay or the capacity of the network. The User's Perspective Another group with a vested interest in what happens to downtown one -way street networks is the users of those facilities. Users can be grouped into three general categories: the motorist, the transit rider, and the pedestrian. Each group views the street network in a different way, as discussed below. Motorists Motorists use the street network as a means for navigating the downtown to get to their destination. In most cases, a downtown motorist's destination is someplace to park the car, namely a garage, lot, or on -street parking space; upon parking, the motorist leaves the vehicle as a pedestrian to access the final destination. It is well known that people attempt to park as close to their ultimate destination as possible, in an effort to minimize walking distance. One -way streets do not pose a major inconvenience for commuters and regular visitors to the downtown; these motorists have learned the downtown network and know the "best route" to their destination. Rather, it is the occasional visitors to downtown who are often confused and disoriented on encountering a one -way street network. Often, these motorists are able to see their destination but are shunted away from it by the one -way streets. But these occasional users are in fact the customers that revitalized downtowns are trying to attract. If circulation in the downtown can be made easier by converting one -way streets, people in this target market segment may be better pleased with their overall downtown experience and become more regular downtown patrons. Transit Patrons A one -way street network exacts a similar toll on the downtown transit system and its users. In a one -way network, stops on the same route for opposite directions are forced to be located on two different streets. Again, the most affected users are the occasional downtown visitors, who are not familiar with the system. For instance, a visitor who is dropped off at a stop downtown on a one -way street may not realize that the transit stop for his return trip is actually located one block away on a different street. Regular transit users can even become victims of this system in sections of downtown with which they are not familiar. In a two -way system, transit stops for a particular route can be located across the street from each other, eliminating this confusing situation. Pedestrians As stated previously, at some point every downtown visitor becomes a pedestrian. Whether one arrives by private vehicle, taxi, or rail or bus transit, it becomes necessary at Walker, Kulash, and McHugh F -2 / 5 some time to navigate the street system on foot. One -way streets present challenges to the pedestrian due to the speed and direction of adjacent vehicular traffic and pedestrian expectations at intersections. On a two -way street, pedestrians always have the choice of walking facing the oncoming traffic or with their backs to it. This choice does not exist on a one -way street, where pedestrians moving in the same direction of the vehicular traffic will always have adjacent traffic coming behind them regardless of which side of the street they choose to walk on. At intersections of two streets that are each two way, pedestrians have an expectation of potential vehicular conflicts with their path as they cross the intersection. This sequence reverses itself for the opposite movement across the intersection, for a total of two conflict sequences that the pedestrian should expect. When a one -way street is included in the intersection, the number of potential conflict sequences increases dramatically. This phenomenon will be discussed in greater detail in the evaluation section of this paper. Suffice it to say, a pedestrian who is crossing an intersection of one- way streets must pay particular attention to the direction of both through and turning traffic to avoid a conflict. It is also important to remember that a one -way street system always has a greater magnitude of vehicle turning movements compared to a two -way system. Any turning movement, regardless of street configuration as one- or two -way, creates exactly the same potential for vehicle /pedestrian conflict, namely, one legally turning vehicle crossing the path of one legally crossing pedestrian. Thus, aside from the complexity of conflict sequences, there are simply more (typically 30 -40 %) vehicle /pedestrian conflicts within a one -way street network than in a comparable two -way system. Downtown Community Perspective Much attention recently has been given to downtown vitality and redevelopment efforts. One -way street conversions to two -way are part of a much bigger effort to make downtowns more livable and economically successful. City leaders, both political and business, are becoming increasingly concerned with the quality of the outdoor environment experienced by downtown visitors. Some national chains are beginning to develop downtown locations, with an emphasis on service industries such as office supplies, bookstores, and coffeehouses. In our experience, most of these retailers prefer the exposure and accessibility offered by a location on a two -way street. This fact is supported by examples such as Vine Street in Cincinnati, where 40% of businesses in this economically depressed downtown corridor closed after the street was converted from two -way to one -way. As retail and entertainment activities begin to increase downtown, cities today are experiencing an influx of new downtown residents not seen in decades. Young professionals with no children, looking for an urban lifestyle, as well as "empty- nesters" who are tired of the big house and yard (with a corresponding big commute) are beginning to return to the housing areas within and immediately adjacent to downtown. For these people, livability is of paramount importance. As shown in Figure 1, large gains in overall livability can often be accomplished while exacting only a slight increase in vehicular delay. The cost of living in downtown neighborhoods is relatively high compared to suburban neighborhoods. Downtown residents expect the high cost of living to be offset F -2 / 10 TRB Circular E -0019: Urban Street Symposium Travel Speed Comparison It is true that overall average through -travel speeds are lower for a two -way street configuration than for a one -way system. However, to achieve a rebalancing of the system, it is important to consider all users of the downtown street network, not just the through traveler. Slower vehicular speeds are safer for crossing pedestrians, as they allow longer gaps in the traffic stream for crossing. Additionally, for those travelers with a destination downtown, accessibility and mobility are usually more important than through vehicular delay. In most downtowns, the delay penalty will be small for the through traveler. For instance, a decrease in average arterial travel speed of five miles per hour over a one- quarter mile segment of network yields an additional three minutes of travel time. This delay incurred by the through traveler must be weighed against the other objectives of the community to determine the acceptability of the impact. Pedestrian Measures of Effectiveness Pedestrian measures of effectiveness such as sidewalk capacity and pedestrian LOS will not be covered in this discussion since they do not pertain specifically to the one -way versus two -way argument. Concerns for downtown pedestrians with regard to one -way streets center on convenience, safety and the quality of the walking environment. The convenience to pedestrians is a key element to the livability and vitality of a successful downtown. A prosperous downtown contains many more offerings of goods and services than a blighted one and is therefore far more attractive to the pedestrian. The conventional wisdom has always assumed that one -way streets were safer and more comfortable for pedestrians to cross than two -way streets. Superficially, it would seem that crossing the single direction of traffic on a one -way street is always preferable to crossing a two -way street. As is often the case, the conventional wisdom is wrong. In fact, crossing a one -way street presents greater difficulties to the pedestrian than crossing a two -way street. The explanation lies in the greater number of different vehicle /pedestrian conflict sequences (hereinafter "conflict sequences ") that are encountered in crossing the one -way street. Any given conflict sequence consists of: (1) the kind of turning movement that the vehicle is engaged in, (2) the direction (left-to -right or vice versa) in which the vehicle path intersects with the pedestrians and (3) the location of the vehicle with respect to the pedestrian's field of view, at the beginning of the vehicle movement. Figure 4 illustrates the conflict sequences for both one -way and two -way intersections. There are only two possible sequences (sequences #1 and #2 in diagram) that pedestrians can encounter in crossing a two -way street. Regardless of what leg of the intersection they cross, they will never encounter other than these two conflict sequences. Further, these two sequences are closely related, essentially the mirror image of each other. On one -way streets, by contrast, there are 16 different conflict sequences that pedestrians can encounter, depending upon which leg of the intersection they are crossing. Further, these sequences vary widely in their component parts. For example, some sequences have only a single conflict, while others have two or even three. Further, the Eclipsing of Storefront Exposure F -2 / 12 TRB CircularE -0019: Urban Street Symposium sequences involve a wide variety of directions of vehicle flow and pedestrian views of the vehicle. The conventional view of the safety of one -way street crossing usually focuses on crossing the upstream leg of the intersection, in which only a single turning movement is encountered (sequence #11 and #12 in the diagram). However, this situation comprises only 2 of the 16 possible conflict sequences. The complexity and variety of the other 14 are typically overlooked when discussing the merits of one -way streets. One -way streets have a negative impact on storefront exposure for those businesses highly dependent on pass -by traffic. As a vehicle stops at or enters an intersection the driver has excellent visibility of the storefronts on the far side of the cross street. On one -way street networks, precious storefront exposure is lost when one direction of travel is removed, causing one side of every cross street to be partially "eclipsed" from view, as illustrated in Figure 5. "Eclipsing" occurs on cross - street storefronts along the Shops, etc. Buildings, Shops, etc. • • • S •5 • •,`• I ♦ ♦`, ; • I I •• 120° , / / / / /i / / / /// Eclipsed Frontage fl • • ♦, t 1' / / / / / / / / / /// Eclipsed Frontage FIGURE 5 Retail eclipsing a diagrammatic summary. July, 9, 2012 Dear City Council Members, My name is William Kramer, and I am the owner of CueMasters Billiards at 900 Central Ave in Dubuque. I have owned CueMasters for the last 10 years, and for the last 35 years it has been operated in the area of 9th and Central, making it one of the oldest business's on Central Avenue, as well as the oldest Pool Room in the State of Iowa. My reason for this letter is to express my concerns for the conversion of 9th Street from one way to two way traffic. If the resolution that is being considered becomes approved it will completely put me out of business. I rely on the parking spots that are available to me on 9th Street, and if they were to become eliminated it would greatly impact my business. Last year the fire department requested that they be granted parking spaces on the West side of Central, which eliminated 5 parking spaces. Then when they redid the 9th street this past year, they took out two more parking spaces for semis to be able to maneuver the corner more safely. Now with the two way project planning in place, this will eliminate three more parking spaces next to my business. I know that the parking ramp could be considered an option for parking, but I, as well as my customers do not find this convenient or cost effective compared to hourly meter parking. I understand that the original reasoning for the two way streets was the rail and bus terminal and the newest planned parking ramp's entrance and exit. I may be wrong but my understanding is that a lot of these proposed projects have changed. My question is, are the two way streets still a necessity? Also, I know the Fire Dept. would like the two way so they could access 9th Street Westbound, to cut down on their response times to their calls. With this in mind, wouldn't it just be possible to make 9th Street two way from Central to Locust? I want to thank you for taking the time to read my letter, and I hope you respect my concerns for my business. I would like to stay where I presently am, but if this proposal passes, I will have to shut down my business or be forced to move, leaving another empty store front on Central Ave. You can contact me at 563 -599 -7884 or email me at totter2 @live.com Sincerely, William Kramer CueMasters Billiards Masterpiece on the Mississippi Dubuque bierd All- America City 1 2007 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager SUBJECT: 9th, 10th, 11th, Elm and Pine Streets: One -Way to Two -Way Conversion DATE: June 13, 2012 City Engineer Gus Psihoyos recommends City Council approval of the conversion of 9th 10t , 11th, Elm and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic. This conversion is instrumental in the City's development of the Intermodal Terminal and Parking Facility, the Historic Millwork District, and the Downtown Central Business District. In October, 2010 Veenstra & Kimm completed a traffic study that indicated that 9th 10th and 11th Streets can sufficiently handle the traffic volume if converted from a one -way to two -way traffic pattern. Based on that recommendation, IIW, PC was selected in February, 2012, to design the improvements required for conversion from one -way to two -way and to provide a comprehensive analysis of the existing traffic signal timings in the Downtown Central Business District. On April 2, 2012, IIW, PC (IIW) and the City Engineering Department held a City Council work session that presented such topics as: Proposed US 52 routing and corridor improvements. Conversion of 9th, 10th, 11th, Elm and Pine Street from a one -way to two -way traffic. Improvements at the Kerper Boulevard, 9th Street, and 11th Street intersection. The City has budgeted $1,725,000 in FY 2012 to make the necessary improvements for conversion from one -way to two -way streets. The one- to two -way conversion of 9th, 10th, 11th, Elm and Pine Streets is instrumental in the City's development of its Intermodal Terminal and Parking Facility, the Historic Millwork District, and the Downtown Central Business District. In 2009, the Cuningham Group of Minneapolis, MN in coordination with the City of Dubuque developed the Historic Millwork District Master Plan. This master plan was adopted by the City Council in February 2009 and recommends the conversion of 9th, 10th and 11th Streets from one -way to two -way. The Engineering Department and IIW Engineers will do a presentation with more detailed information. I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council approval. Michael C. Van Milligen MCVM:jh Attachment cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager Gus Psihoyos, City Engineer 2 Page 1 of 2 Kevin Firnstahl - One -Way to Two Way Street conversion endorsement II From: To: Date: Subject: CC: Attachments: "Dan LoBianco" <dan@dubuquemainstreet.org> "Kevin H. Firnstahl" <kfirnsta @cityofdubuque.org> 7/11/2012 2:49 PM One -Way to Two Way Street conversion endorsement II "Mike Van Milligen" <ctymgr @cityofdubuque.org >, "David Heiar" <Dheiar @ci... map of one -way and two -way streets.pdf Kevin; Per our conversation this afternoon in which we discovered the e -mail I sent to you Tuesday did not get to you I will try this e -mail again in two sections, holding the larger attachment to come with a separate e -mail. Attached please find the e -mail, of which we discussed yesterday, that I originally forwarded directly to the City Council members in regard to the Dubuque Main Street position in support of conversion of 9th, 10th 11th Elm & Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic. After discussing the issue with my executive board and realizing the issue is taking more time and creating more debate than we anticipated, we have decided to submit the materials to you to request they be placed in the council packet for Monday (assuming the conversion is back on the agenda). In addition, we are attaching two other one -page documents for the packet as exhibits to support our endorsement of proceeding with the conversion. The first is simply an information sheet, referencing the four separate places in the Historic Millwork District Master Plan, in which conversion of 9th & 11th from one -way to two -way traffic is recommended. As a reminder, the Master Plan was adopted by council & Dubuque Main Street in February 2009, long before the intermodal facility was part of our plans ... Again, we simply demonstrate that while important as an element of our intermodal campus, this conversion would be the right thing to do even with no intermodal plans. Finally, I am attaching an aerial map of the district demonstrating how today, if at the intersection of Elm & 9th Street, it would take 9 %2 + blocks of travel (going any of three ways as options) to arrive at the QuickLube on White Street, as a destination. (If asked to give directions from there, how would anyone provide a visitor directions in that regard ... You might consider sending them straight onto the highway and more easily direct them by way of 1st & Locust, an excursion of well over a mile.) That same destination would only be a 3%2 block trip if the streets were more properly converted to two -way traffic. We know the aerial is dated, but the travel plan did not change with the TIGER implementation. We hope this demonstrates how circulation and access is still a very real issue in the Millwork District. In addition, I realize it is an action item; however, as someone representing an organization that has researched this issue fairly extensively, I would like to request permission from Mayor Buol to address the council. If anyone needs more information or further clarification on these materials, please direct them to me per my contact information below. Sincerely, -Dan LoBianco file: /1/C :IUsers/kf'irnstalAppDatalLocal/TemplXPgrpwise/4FFD927BDBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Page 2 of 2 Dan LoBianco Executive Director Dubuque Main Street 1069 Main Street Dubuque, IA 52001 563- 588 -4400 www dubuquemainstreet orq Mission Statement Dubuque Main Street is a not - for - profit organization dedicated to the development and ongoing support of downtown as THE place in our community to live, work & play We serve eight downtown districts using four areas of concentration 1 Design - Attractive buildings, storefronts, streets, signs, green space and well - preserved architecture 2 Economic Development - A strong commercial community, achieved through business growth and recruitment, job creation, as well as adaptive reuse made possible through resource programs, financial assistance and incentives 3 Promotion - We bring people downtown to live, work & play 4 Organization - We build partnerships by collaborating between many organizations, across the public /private spectrum file: I//C :/Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Temp/XPgipwise /4FFD927BDBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 MAIN STREET 1O 6 M A I N S T R E E T • D U B U Q U E • I O W A • 5 2 0 0 1 4 7 2 4 [ = n ' ] o 0 4 4 0 0 • [ 0 0 0 ] 0 o 0 0 0 4 0 F A X • W W W D U B U Q U E M A I N S T R E E T O R G June 14, 2012 City Council Members City of Dubuque Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members On behalf of the board of directors of Dubuque Main Street, I am wntmg in support of converting sections of 9th, 10th, 11th, Elm, and Pine Streets from one -way to two -way traffic Not only is the concept of converting these street to two -way traffic supported in the Historic Millwork District Master Plan, adopted by the City Council, the Dubuque Main Street board of directors, and the Historic Millwork District Revitalization ownership group, conversion from one -way streets to two -way traffic is generally thought of as an appropriate effort to further enhance the viability of downtowns, according to the Main Street Center within the National Trust for Historic Preservation Advocacy for two -way traffic in downtowns is supported in the three reports attached As you will note, the studies address both negative and positive aspects of street conversion, but most urban center advocates nationwide and the National Complete Streets Coalition espouse to the value of two -way streets when traffic is not too heavy to move efficiently with pedestrian - friendly streets I have only included base information and conclusions of the Clemson University study If you desire the full 80+-page report, complete with comprehensive data, let me know We really see three major advantages to converting these streets to two -way traffic 1) It really is the next step, after the TIGER Grant implementation, in the Complete Streets initiative the City has endeavored upon The two way streets, not just in the Millwork District but traveling up to Main and Locust Streets, will make these streets safer Two -way streets calm traffic We know in the long run we will see fewer accidents and those that occur will be at lower speeds and have less dangerous impacts In addition, pedestrian peace -of -mind and safety will improve exponentially Specifically on 9th Street, we concur with the wishes of the fire chief to enable our public safety vehicles to travel legally in any direction as they leave our fire headquarters As recently as this past Tuesday, I observed a relatively panicked Illinois driver almost angle park to get to the side of the left lane of 9th between Main & Iowa, as she observed the emergency vehicles leaving the station and head out towards her, west on 9th Street (She had no way of knowing the vehicles would be turning to the north on Iowa ) 2) The conversion to two -way traffic will add valuable exposure to the commercial entities in our emerging Millwork District and along the connecting corridors up to Locust Street Residents and visitors will drive by our retailers' and other important businesses' signs and street -front properties in both directions Customer access is a crucial benefit to the conversion, as is outlined in the attached studies 3) Another valuable benefit to having two -way traffic in our city center is travel distances and ease of orientation National studies show and we know from our conversion of Main, Iowa, 4th, and 5th Streets in the late '90s that after an adjustment period, ease of navigation through our central business district will improve Infrequent users of a street network do not have the knowledge needed to choose alternative routes and get frustrated when they have to travel out of their way to reach a destination Furthermore, even frequent users are forced to make out -of- direction travel choices to reach a destination with one -way streets Should anyone need further details of our endorsement of the two -way street conversion, please call me at 563 -588- 4400 I will also be in attendance at Monday's council meeting, should clarification be needed then Sincerely, Daniel L LoBianco Executive Director cc Mike Van Milligen A MAIN S T R E E T I O W A A F F I L I A T E Master Plan • Page 11 • Page 20 • Page 33 • Page 61 Mention of Two Way Streets In the Historic Millwork District Master Plan adopted February 2009 Private streets, dead -end streets, one -way streets and the elevated highway structure contribute to the loss of connectivity and introduce challenges to transit, walking and wayfinding in the District. Project Goals and Objectives • Balance the circulation system • Return 9`h and 11th Streets into two -way streets • Minimize impacts of truck traffic not destined for the District Gray Infrastructure • Improve regional access to the District, the Port, and Downtown • Work with IDOT to improve regional access to the District by changing 9`h and 11th to two way streets. The Plan • Streets • In addition, the Plan recommends reprogramming 9`h and 11th Streets to two -way in order to improve access to the District and wayfinding throughout downtown. ONE -WAY TO TWO -WAY STREET CONVERSIONS AS A PRESERVATION AND DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION TOOL: THE CASE STUDY OF UPPER KING STREET, CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University and the Graduate School of the College of Charleston In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Historic Preservation by Meagan Elizabeth Baco May 2009 Accepted by: Robert D. Russell, Jr., Ph.D., Committee Chair Marcus T. Allen, Ph.D. Jonathan H. Poston Barry L. Stiefel, Ph.D. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION There is a common adage used amongst preservationists that indicates use as a major factor in ensuring the continued preservation of a building. When a building is no longer useful as its intended purpose or even with a modified use, the probability that it will be neglected or demolished increases drastically. This is particularly noticeable in historic commercial storefronts and the streets that they line. Furthermore, it is difficult to preserve commercial buildings for two reasons, they by their nature change frequently to keep up with the economic trends, and secondly, because the way in which Americans currently shop has siphoned business away from central business districts. The twentieth century was a time for great change in American cities. The first half was a period of growth, popularity, and influence. It is in this time that automobile traffic was fully integrated into the working infrastructure of urban environments. In order to accommodate their machines, traffic engineers promoted the concept of one -way streets. One -way streets carry a greater capacity of traffic and allow cars to move at faster speeds. Based on other national trends, residential properties were neglected due to increased suburbanization, but the commercial aspects of cities were maintained. However, in the late twentieth century commercial ventures also increasingly left the city. Many central business districts in downtowns or major business streets in large cities were abandoned. After a long period of decline, a new interest in downtown has begun to emerge. 1 Along with the new interest came a new perspective on the place and purpose of the automobile. Starting in the 1960s, the concept of traffic calming entered many American cities. By decreasing the negative effects of the automobile, residential neighborhoods were successfully improved and it can even be said that they regained their historic appeal. The same concept was soon extended to historic commercial streets. Because access is essential for commercial ventures, however, there must be a balance of automobile traffic, pedestrian safety, and general attractiveness of the area. Remember, shoppers must choose to shop. A common method for calming the traffic on commercial streets is the re- conversion of one -way streets to two -way streets. The decreased traffic capacity and traffic speed, along with streetscape improvements, have been successful components for downtown revitalization. Charleston, South Carolina's business district on King Street has in many ways followed national trends of the twentieth century. Long operated as a busy commercial street, it was converted to one -way traffic in the 1950s to decrease traffic congestion. When the national decline of urban areas and development of suburban communities began in the mid twentieth century, the one -way street served as a commuter road and not as a business street. The shopping district continued to decline until the 1980s when several publicly funded projects aided the revitalization of Lower King Street, south of Calhoun Street. The benefits of these projects, however, did not reach north of Calhoun Street, to the area known as Upper King Street. It was not until 1992 that the area was granted appropriate attention from the local government, preservationists, and shoppers and a full retail strategy study was 2 Charleston AFB Charleston AFB Intl Airport North Charleston Mt Pleasant 'outside Highway 41 W Ciop, alive nig` Sound Mt Pleasant "Mt Pleasant 526 yto S P . 41 1 Derives Isle? West Ashley - -Johns Island • West As inside Mar _.. may.. a•varn r Hampton 10 Par? -. Charleston t A' Wild Dunes ? P' Isle'of "� 'Palms 1' 17 Charleston Harbor •8ulllvan's Island n '- .13—es Island James (stand Johns Island (oo o gee' Charleston Roper st Franis p' ��5t\ Co Memorial — Rehabstabon St Hospital \\ Hospital Ga�hpU Muse C.liiltrens `) V v ���P�nn Lake C See t / Moultrie in o! Plaggrnd Broad St _ Ir - ICharleston Coast Guard Station °'O'yu,.. 1, 1 r Li 0 HAtili Figure 1 1 (UPPER) Map of the Charleston Metropolitan area Figure 12 (LOWER) Map of the Charleston Peninsula, including downtown Charleston, the most historic and urban area of the Metropolitan area King Street travels in the north -south direction near the center of the peninsula Upper King Street, the focus of this thesis, is defined as the area of King Street bounded on the south by Calhoun Street and to the north at Spring Street completed for the commercial district. While there is no mention of a one -way to two - way conversion in the 1992 study, Upper King Street was converted to two -way traffic in 1994, following general recommendations of the study. The one -way to two - way conversion acted as a catalyst for further revitalization, and Upper King Street now resembles the busy and diverse commercial corridor of the past, with several new additions and themes as well. City officials, merchants and shoppers, have observed the benefits of the conversion as generally successful but there have been no further study into the effects of the conversion on real estate values, pedestrian safety, business retention, new business development, or any other aspect. The goal of this thesis is to statistically evaluate the practice of converting one -way streets to two -way operation in historic commercial corridors by studying Upper King Street. While some studies are available that describe the decision making process of past one -way to two -way conversion, few go beyond anecdotal evaluations after the conversion. The trend of conversions has continued because of their apparent success, but in order to be held up as viable methods for revitalization and preservation, more statistical and analytical research is required. The next chapter of this thesis is devoted to presenting the pros and cons of both one -way and two -way streets as commercial corridors and understanding the practice. In the comparison, variables were chosen to show business and pedestrian safety related issues. One -way to two -way street conversions fall under a larger category of traffic calming that is described in Chapter Three. Following this information, several case studies are presented along with current information on the state of traffic calming and conversions in South Carolina and the City of Charleston. 4 The second half of this thesis delves further into the specific case of Upper King Street, including its history, its re- conversion to two -way traffic in 1994 and the evaluation of that conversion. A detailed history of Upper King Street is presented in Chapter Four that outlines major economic, transportation, and preservation trends from the 1950s to the 1990s. Finally, Chapter Five contains analytical and statistical evaluation of the one -way to two -way conversion of Upper King Street. The type of businesses found on the street along with vacancy rates derived from City Directories are presented in a brief look at the benefits of two -way traffic. The most detailed analysis involves creating a regression model with data from the Charleston County Assessor's Office. The analysis evaluates the change in sale price for commercial properties between the years 1990 and 1998, and identifies the most significant variables. On King Street, it was found that an increase of property values can be associated with the conversion of traffic from one -way to two -way. By expanding the traditional scope of preservation research to including commercial district revitalization and real estate techniques, this thesis seeks to validate the field to a large audience. The concept of historic preservation, along with new perspectives on urbanity and livability can come together to help create successful places. One -way to two -way street conversions are a method of revitalization, and therefore a method of preservation, especially when implemented in historic commercial districts. 5 CHAPTER TWO COMPARISON OF ONE -WAY AND TWO -WAY STREETS AS COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS During the high point of commercial urban development in the early to mid twentieth century, American cities grew rapidly in density and importance. At the same time, automobile traffic increased exponentially in urban areas. This mobility increased access to all parts of cities, but also created unforeseen traffic problems. Because of the influx of cars, roadways were unprepared to deal with increased traffic volume. First much of the urban traffic volume increase is attributed to the increase of automobiles on the street and then, later in the twentieth century, the need to facilitate traffic in and out of downtown areas by commuting suburbanites. Traffic engineers tried to accommodate an ever increasing number of automobiles through urban areas. Traffic engineers prescribed numerous measures widely, including highways, major arterials, and more precise traffic management. Smaller traffic projects were implemented in tighter urban areas that worked with the existing street network. This included street widening, construction of parking garages, and the conversion of many two -way streets to one -way streets. Most one -way streets in this country were first created from two -way streets in the 1930s through the 1950s. These conversions took place in areas built before the automobile became the prevalent form of transportation. Such areas tend to have narrower streets and smaller blocks than post -auto cities. One -way streets were thus an attempt to accommodate auto traffic in areas not built for the auto.' Thoreau Institute, "Should Cities Convert One -Way Streets to Two Way ?" The Vanishing Automobile 30 Available at http / /www ti org /vaupdate30 html Accessed November 2009 6 Traffic engineers and municipal governments accepted the benefits of one - way streets. At this time, traffic engineers did not seek public participation or suggestions from the communities affected, and hundreds of one -way streets were created to accommodate the automobile. The goal of city centers was to remain accessible and viable by allowing a high amount of automobile traffic. Furthermore, for some cities, one -way streets offered a way to increase traffic capacity and decrease congestion without the construction of new highways, arterials, or other thoroughfares. Because it's confined geographic setting and dense road network was not conducive to highways, the historic city of Charleston, South Carolina completed several one -way street traffic plans in the 1950s. Some streets were widened during this time, but few network changes were made throughout downtown Charleston beyond one -way conversions. After several decades of boom, Charleston, like the majority of American downtowns, experienced bust in the 1960s through 1990s. As the rural landscape changed through residential suburbanization, so did the central cities. Over time, commercial ventures sought the same benefits as suburban homeowners: easy automotive travel, and cheap land.2 With this exodus of commercial power, downtowns lost retail businesses, restaurants, and office space. Traffic volumes in American cities decreased substantially between the late 1950s and early 1970s, no longer requiring the capacity offered by one -way street grids. A new interest in downtown was not seen until the early 1990s, partially spurred by the building damage caused by Hurricane Hugo in 1989. 2 G Wade Walker, Walter M Kulash, and Brian T McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks7,1999, 2 7 Because of their strategic location within cities and typical long running length, commercial streets were the ones most frequently converted to one -way. The typical types of lots along these urban streets were long, rectangular parcels with the narrow side abutting the streets. This configuration allowed for maximization of storefront exposure and number of businesses per block. Furthermore, this type of development pattern was created before the emergence of the automobile but is still a viable and desirable layout. Many of America's historic downtowns illustrate this pattern and are seeking to revitalize and preserve its importance. This resurgence of interest was supported by the status of downtowns as cultural and entertainment centers, as well as their previous role as commercial centers. The revitalization of central cities to their former status is wide and well - supported and there is a desire to correct the transportation patterns that contributed to their decline. It is in the 1990s that the one -way streets of the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s began to be reconverted to two -way operation. Presented below is a comparison of one -way and two -way streets as urban commercial corridors. The criteria used are traffic efficiency, including capacity and speed, as well as pedestrian safety, total travel distance, and ease of orientation, and business recognition. These four categories of criteria have been chosen to highlight both the commercial and public safety issues of one -way and two -way streets. TRAFFIC EFFICIENCY: CAPACITY, SPEED, AND TOTAL TRAVEL TIME Traffic engineers of the early and mid twentieth century created a new science and profession aimed at facilitating vehicular traffic. This period of American 8 history includes the paving of national highways, regional thruways and a reevaluation of urban transportation. National trends of suburbanization also affected the travel needs of downtowns. It was thought that cities could best compete with suburbanization by allowing the greatest volume of traffic to travel to and through their downtown. In order to keep up with automobile dependence, many downtowns converted two -way streets to one -way streets to gain traffic capacity, traffic speed and the perceived benefits. The perspective of traffic engineers was narrow and focused on the automobile. Because of this, one -way and two -way streets will first be compared based on traffic efficiency. Traffic efficiency is a measure of the speed and success of transporting people and freight on roads to a determined destination. There are several components of traffic efficiency, including traffic capacity, traffic speed, and total travel time. Capacity is a measure given to a street or road that indicates the traffic volume that it can accommodate over a defined period. The measure of traffic capacity is related to the determined or estimated traffic volume which represents the vehicles per hour, day, month, or any determined period. Vehicular speed of traffic is determined by the posted speed limit and the ability of a vehicle to reach and maintain that speed. Beyond speed limits, placement of regulatory systems such as stop signs and traffic lights, as well as the design of the street itself can regulate traffic. The design of the street can affect the number of vehicular conflicts at intersections. Traffic capacity, traffic volume, and rate of vehicular speed determine the total travel time needed to reach a determined location. 9 One -way streets increase traffic capacity when implemented in pairs. These "couplets" spread the total number of cars that previously traveled on a single street to two streets. The total increase of capacity gained by converting a two -way street to a pair of one -way streets has been determined to be as much as 50 percent.3 In a time when urban streets were severely congested with traffic, this increase in capacity was greatly desired. Another benefit of one -way streets, seen by traffic engineers, was increased vehicular speed. Because one -way streets segregate directional traffic, each one - way couplet can have wider travel lanes. Wider travel lanes encourage an increase of vehicular speed because of the decreased perception of friction. The appearance of friction created by a narrow street, on- street parking, and /or on- coming traffic affects the driver's perception and therefore his or her calculation of safe speed. In fact, traffic theorists in the 1930s promoted one -way streets because they required the driver to pay less attention.4 Also affecting vehicular speed is the placement and frequency of uniform traffic control devices, such as stop signs and traffic signals. On the commercial streets of medium sized cities, traffic lights are used more than stop signs. Traffic lights on one -way streets can be synchronized to reduce the number of stops. It is understood that traffic lights stop traffic at their immediate location and decrease speed while approaching and leaving an intersection. By creating a traffic pattern 3 Traffic Engineering Handbook, ed James L Pline, Fourth ed (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey Prentice Hall, 1992), 330 4 Richard W Lyles, Chessa D Faulkner, and Ali Muazzam Syed, Conversions of Streets from One -Way to Two-Way Operation, (East Lansing, MI Michigan Department of Transportation, 2000), 5 10 that reduces stopping, automobiles are allowed "to proceed indefinitely at a fixed rate of speed. "5 Furthermore, because of the design of one -way streets, this fixed speed is increased. In the 1990s, the purpose of one -way streets in American downtowns began to be re- evaluated. The circumstances, including traffic congestion, that lead to their proliferation were no longer universally apparent. Furthermore, the goal of downtown revitalization often includes the decrease or mitigation of automobile presence. Issues of traffic efficiency were also paramount to the decision to convert one -way streets to two -way streets but the latest conversions utilized a much different set of criteria. Traffic capacity increases when a two -way street is converted to a one -way street. This fact is not typically disputed, but high- capacity one -way couplets may no longer be needed nor desired in downtown areas. A conversion of a one -way street to a two -way street can decrease traffic capacity. This decrease in capacity can lead to increased congestion. Traffic engineers of the mid twentieth century reconfigured cities to eliminate congestion while some downtowns are now seeking congestion. The appearance of congestion, to a certain degree, can give an area a look of healthiness and vitality. Congestion is measured on an A to F scale, known as Level of Service (LOS). A LOS of A characterizes highways and major free - flowing transportation routes, while a LOS of F means stop- and -go traffic.6 An appropriate level of congestion in a downtown area is between a LOS of D and E, which 5 Thoreau Institute, "Should Cities Convert One -Way Streets to Two Way ?' The Vanishing Automobile 30 Available at http / /www ti org /vaupdate30 html Accessed November 2009 6 John D Edwards, "Traffic Issues for Smaller Communities," Journal of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (1998) 32 11 represents a wait no greater than sixty seconds at an intersection.' This LOS offers a balance of efficiency and congestion. As discussed earlier, one -way streets allow for more vehicular traffic and at higher speeds. Even with traffic speed control measures such as a posted speed limit, stop signs and traffic lights, drivers on one -way streets typically travel at higher speeds. Higher speed was long desired by traffic engineers even in congested cities, but is now often seen as unsafe to motorists and pedestrians. In commercial areas, operating speeds of 20 to 25 miles per hour are ideal.8 This speed allows a driver to access areas in a reasonable amount of time while also creating a pace that allows for observance of storefronts, signs, and display windows. For commercial ventures on downtown streets, visibility is essential for success. Downtown commercial streets have seen a dramatic change in their level of use in the twentieth century. Their boom and bust have occurred in the same century. Cities of the early twentieth century were centers of retail operations, office headquarters, and cultural and entertainment venues. With their popularity came the need to facilitate automobile traffic to and from these destinations. One -way streets were a common method implemented by traffic engineers to gain traffic capacity and increase traffic speed. However, with a shift in residential and commercial growth to the suburbs, the need for such streets decreased and in fact contributed to the further decline of central cities by creating hostile environments to all non - motorists. With new perspectives and needs for downtown traffic, many one -way streets were ' bid , 32 , John D Edwards, Converting One -Way Streets to Two-Way Managing Traffic on Main Street, (Washington, D C The National Trust's Main Street Center, 2002), 13 8 Edwards, Traffic Issues for Smaller Communities, 32 12 converted back to two -way streets. With a desire to decrease the negative effects of automobile traffic in downtowns, an increase in congestion and a decrease in vehicular speed were desired. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY Perhaps the greatest consideration for one -way to two -way conversions is that of pedestrian safety. The speed and pattern of vehicular traffic on a street greatly impacts the level of safety afforded to non - vehicular street users. This group of users can be pedestrians, bicyclists, and other non - motorists. Pedestrian safety in downtown commercial streets is paramount because pedestrians are shoppers. Even shoppers that arrive at a commercial street by automobile are "at some point...a pedestrian. In most cases, a downtown motorist's destination is some place to park the car, namely a garage, lot or on- street parking space; upon parking, the motorist leaves the vehicle as a pedestrian to access the final destination. "9 Both sides of the one -way to two -way debate accept the importance of pedestrian safety but there is not an agreement as to which way of travel is actually safer. There are studies and statistics that quantitatively show the benefits of both one -way and two -way streets on pedestrian safety. Both sides of the debate are presented here, as pedestrian safety may depend on characteristics that can only be determined on a case -by -case basis. However, there are several benefits of two -way streets that positively affect pedestrian safety and pedestrian experience; a relatively new criterion for successful downtowns. 9 Walker, Kulash, and McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks ?, 4 13 Pedestrian crosswalk. • Conflict points two -way street pattern. ] One conflict removed depending on diection of one -way traffic on cross street. Q Conflict removed by one -way street pattern. , One RTOR conflict removed— dependng on direction of one -way traffic on cross street. Noe: Confkt dupkated or cross street. I-- _ L — — — -.J — — Pedestrian crosswalk. • Conflia points two -way sheet pattern. ❑• One conflict removed depending on direction of one -way traffic on (TOSS street OO Conflict removed by one-vmy street petters ® One RTOR conflict removed ---- depending on direction of one -way traffic on cross street. Note. Conflict duplicated on cross street. Figure 2.1 Illustration of vehicle /pedestrian conflicts of one -way street intersections All black dots identify conflict points in two -way street intersections All but two (right) or four (left) are presented as being eliminated in one -way street networks This illustration and the article, from which it was taken, present one -way streets as safer than two-way streets From "One -Way Streets Provide Superior Safety and Convenience," 1998, pg 48-49 Pedestrian safety has always been a concern for traffic engineers At the time of many two -way to one -way conversions, it was believed that one -way streets offered several advantages to pedestrians The main principle of this promotion was based on the need of both drivers and pedestrian to only be aware of traffic traveling in one direction 10 There are also sources that contend there are fewer vehicle /pedestrian conflict points in a one -way system An article in the Journal of the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 1998 calculated that there are either two or four conflict points in a one -way system depending on the number of lanes and 10 Traffic Engineering Handbook, 331 14 type of turns allowed, up to 24 conflict points of any two -way configuration (Figure 2.1).11 Furthermore, because vehicles only travel in one direction, both head -on and left -turn accidents will dramatically decrease. It has been stated that traffic accidents involving both vehicle /vehicle and vehicle /pedestrian conflicts can decrease between 10 to 50 percent if one -way streets are employed.12 While there are indicators for the level of safety provided to pedestrians on one -way streets, there is a similar amount of evidence that contradicts that conclusion. The Traffic Engineers Handbook published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers indicates, "vehicles turning left out of one -way streets appear to hit pedestrians significantly more frequently than do all other turning vehicles. "13 Furthermore, in an article published in the Journal of the Institute of Transportation Engineers in 2004, a computer model was used to compare one -way and two -way networks and concluded that on one -way streets, vehicles travel at higher speeds, have a lesser average delay, and stop less often, and because of these attribute are not safe for pedestrians. Superficially, it would seem that crossing single direction of traffic on one -way streets is preferable to crossing a two -way street. As is often the case, the conventional wisdom is wrong. In fact, crossing a one -way street presents greater difficulties to the pedestrians than crossing a two -way street. The explanation lays in the greater numbers of different vehicle /pedestrian conflict sequences that are encountered in crossing a one -way street. 14 John J Stemley, "One -way streets provide superior safety and convenience," Journal of Institute of Transportation Engineers (1998), 48 12 University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, "One -way Streets," in Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook (1999), 89 13 Traffic Engineering Handbook, 331 14 Lum Kit Meng and Soe Thu, "A Microscopic Simulation Study of Two -Way Street Network Versus One -Way Street Network," Journal of The Institution of Engineers, Singapore 44, no 2 (2004) 114 15 Analysis of vehicle /pedestrian conflict points by those advocating for two -way streets has been calculated as two possible sequences for conflicts at a two -way street intersection and sixteen possible conflict sequences at one -way intersections (Figure 2.2).15 This is a much different conclusion than that previously presented from the article "One -Way Streets Provide Superior Safety and Convenience." It appears that with the manipulation of specific intersection criteria it is possible to determine a far different number of vehicle /pedestrian conflicts. The individual intersections in commercial districts must be evaluated on a case -by -case basis to create an accurate measure of pedestrian safety. While the number of vehicle /pedestrian conflicts and the rate of accidents cannot be unequivocally determined until the traffic pattern is determined and implemented, there are indications that two -way streets are safer. As noted earlier, two -way streets, regardless of posted speed limit tend to have slower vehicular speeds. A decrease in vehicular speed decreases both the total number of collisions and because of lower speeds can decrease the seriousness of those collisions.16 15 Walker, Kulash, and McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks?, 11 16 Reid H Ewing, Traffic Calming State of the Practice (Washington, D C Institution of Transportation Engineers, 1999), 109 16 Figure 2.2 Illustration showing sixteen total pedestrianlvehicle conflicts created by a system of one -way streets and only two possible conflict points in two-way street systems The article om which this figure was taken advocates for the conversion of one-way street to two-way streets in order to increase pedestrian safety From "Are We Strangling Ourselves With One -Way Street Networks?" 1999, pg 11 17 Pedestrian safety is a quality of life issue. The ability of non - motorists to utilize public space, specifically in the form of commercial corridors is essential for downtown vitality. Research by traffic engineers and those in other fields has competently analyzed the safety of both one -way and two -way streets. The results of these studies seem to be reliant on a number of factors beyond the direction of travel. It has been determined, however, that the single most dangerous vehicle /pedestrian conflict, a left turn from a one -way street, only occurs in a one - way street network. There is also evidence that two -way streets are better for pedestrian safety based on the decreased traffic speed. Pedestrian safety is cited as a major factor in the conversion of one -way streets to two -way streets in Denver, Colorado, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Toledo, Ohio." TRAVEL DISTANCE AND EASE OF ORIENTATION The success of urban transportation is dependent on the ability of a motorist to reach his or her destination. Traffic capacity, speed, and street design affect this ability, so too does the availability of routes within the greater street network. Placement of one -way and two -way streets affects the number of routes available to reach a destination, and may increase or decrease total travel distance. Knowledge of the street network can greatly influence the ease with which a driver can find 17 Robert F Dorroh and Robert A Kochevar, One -Way Conversions for Calming Denver's Streets, 1996), 110 , A Nelessen Associates, Milwaukee Downtown Catalytic Projects (Milwaukee, WI City of Milwaukee, 1999), 43 , Development Consulting Group and Typlan Consulting Ltd, One Way Couplets Impact Analysis (Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada City of Kelowna, Downtown Kelowna Association, 2003), 20 18 suitable routes. Drivers that traverse an area more frequently are better able to evaluate the best route. Infrequent users of a street network do not have the knowledge needed to choose alternative routes and are therefore greatly affected by the street network. If the street network cannot be assessed and understood by infrequent users, such as visitors to a new city, motorists will often be forced to travel out of their way to reach a destination. Furthermore, even frequent users are forced to make out -of- direction travel to reach a destination. An easily understood road network is necessary to decrease total travel distance and ensure ease of orientation for drivers and therefore the ability to access their final destination. By limiting travel in one direction, one -way streets restrict access to certain destinations in the street network and increase total travel distance. The need of street users to make extra turns was and is known by traffic engineers.18 It seems that a decrease in congestion and an increase in travel speed were more desirable in the mid twentieth century than the most efficient travel distance. Today there is evidence that some traffic engineers are still unconcerned with total travel distance because it does not always affect total travel time.19 Because total travel time is dependent on a number of other factors, travel distance is not the most important variable. However, in requiring additional turns and out -of- direction travel, the street network may become confusing to infrequent street users. [I]t is the occasional visitors to downtown who are often most confused and disoriented on encountering a one -way street network. Often, these motorists are able to see their destination but are shunted away from it by 18 Traffic Engineering Handbook, 332 19 Stemley, One -way streets provide superior safety and convenience 19 one -way streets. But these occasional users are in fact the customers that revitalized downtowns are trying to attract. If circulation in the downtown area can be made easier by converting one -way streets, people in this target market segment may be better pleased with their overall downtown experience and become more regular downtown patrons.20 During the revitalization of many American downtowns in the 1990s, it was determined that two -way streets were more "user friendly" for local, regional, and out -of -town shoppers. The desire to improve the ease of orientation by infrequent visitors is referenced in one -way to two -way conversions in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Lubbock, Texas; Lansing, Michigan; Lafayette, Indiana; Dubuque, Iowa; New Haven, Connecticut and Great Falls, Montana.21 BUSINESS RECOGNITION: VISIBILITY AND STOREFRONT EXPOSURE Traffic efficiency, pedestrian safety, and travel distance are common variables in assessing one -way and two -way streets. In evaluating the use of one - way and two -way streets as a commercial corridor there are more factors, including business visibility and storefront exposure. Business visibility is the ability of a driver to see and identify a storefront or sign and assess its use. Storefront exposure is the ability of a driver to see a specific storefront based on its location within the street network and within the block. These factors are essential to understanding the pros and cons of one -way and two -way traffic on commercial streets. The assertion that one -way streets are good for business is verified for only a certain type of business. "Supermarkets and other high - volume, low- margin stores 20 Walker, Kulash, and McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks ?, 4 21 A Nelessen Associates, Milwaukee Downtown Catalytic Projects, 43 , Lyles, Faulkner, and Syed, Conversions of Streets from One -Way to Two-Way Operation, 13 , ibid , 13 , Development Consulting Group and Typlan Consulting, One Way Couplets Impact Analysis, 20 , ibid , 20 , ibid , 20 , Planning Department, City of Great Falls, Montana, The Conversion of Downtown One -Way Streets Back to Two -Way Streets , 2007), 5 20 that have their own parking lots probably do better on a one -way couplet that gives lots of people quick access to those stores.22 This type of business typically sells convenience items needed regularly by a large number of people, such as household supplies, food, and other regularly purchased items. While urban environments, specifically small historic commercial districts, do sell this type of item they are not sold in a supermarket setting, but in small groceries. Many storefronts of downtown commercial corridors are locally owned and sell unique items. Research has determined the appropriate speeds for smaller commercial streets and for business visibility. A traffic engineer of more than forty years, John D. Edwards, has determined that "operating speeds of 20 to 25 mph are necessary so that the shopper does not feel hurried and so that a leisurely pace is present. Furthermore, at operating speeds in excess of 30 mph it is difficult for the motorist or a researcher to even observe the types of retail outlets present. "23 The posted speed of a street can reflect this appropriate speed, but because users of one -way streets are more likely to accelerate beyond the posted limit, storefronts and signs will be even less visible. Because the shopper does not typically plan purchases from small businesses on commercial streets, they can be considered "impulse" purchases. For this type of sale, storefront visibility from a moving automobile is essential, even if the shopper intends to return to the store on foot. 22 Walker, Kulash, and McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks, 5 23 Edwards, Traffic Issues for Smaller Communities, 32 21 Figure 2.3 Graphic representation of eclipsed storefronts caused by one -way streets. From "Are We Strangling Ourselves With One -Way Street Networks ?" 1999. Increased vehicular speed decreases business visibility, so too does the direction of travel. If direction of travel is restricted to one direction, as it is on a one - way street, storefront eclipsing occurs. Storefront eclipsing is the loss of exposure to first floor commercial property caused by one -way streets. A methodology to determine storefront eclipsing was determined by several members of Glatting Jackson Kercher Anglin Lopez Rinehart Inc., a national community planning firm specializing in urban design, transportation planning and engineering. "The quantity of eclipsed store frontage is a function of the quantity of one -way street approaches 22 in the intersection, block perimeter size, building setback and street width. "24 Consider the approach needed to view the maximum number of storefronts (Figure 2.3): As a vehicle stops at or enters an intersection the driver has excellent visibility of the storefronts on the far side of the cross street. On one -way street networks, precious storefronts exposure is lost when one direction of travel is removed, causing one side of every cross street to be partially 'eclipsed' from view...25 Even opponents of one -way to two -way conversions admit that two -way streets may provide better visibility based on the type of business. "Specialty stores that rely on impulse sales and depend on high margins per sale do better on two -way streets, since only half their potential customers would see them on a one -way couplet. "26 The stores along most small historic commercial streets are exactly the type of businesses that do better on two -way streets. Furthermore, there is evidence that very successful nationally known chain retailers of coffee and books choose locations on two -way streets because of increased exposure and accessibility.27 The direction of travel on a street greatly influences the exposure of storefronts and signs to vehicular traffic. There are numerous ways that traffic patterns are determined with the decision typically in the hands of the traffic engineer. In the 1950s, traffic engineers sought to facilitate the greatest amount of traffic through urban areas; little consideration was given to other factors such as business vitality, pedestrian safety 24 Walker, Kulash, and McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks, 13 25 Meng and Thu, A Microscopic Simulation Study of Two-Way Street Network Versus One -Way Street Networks ?, 114 26 Thoreau Institute, Should Cities Convert One -Way Streets to Two Way ?, 29 October 2008 27 Walker, Kulash, and McHugh, Downtown Streets Are We Strangling Ourselves on One -Way Networks ?, 5 23 CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION The field of historic preservation promotes a set of concepts, standards and skills that can be integrated into myriad other professions and fields. In this thesis the fields of transportation planning, specifically traffic calming and methods of economic development, were employed under the direction of public and private interests in order to recapture the past successes of Charleston's major commercial corridor, Upper King Street. In Charleston, a leading city in preservation advocacy and action, these revitalization efforts were aligned with the need to retain the historic use, design, and buildings of the area. In the case of Upper King Street, it was, in fact, transportation planners working to revitalize the business district who were responsible for the preservation of the area. The connection between preservation and downtown revitalization is clearly illustrated in the National Trust for Historic Preservation's Main Street program. By combining the concepts of economic redevelopment and historic preservation, each can aid the goals of the other. In 2002, the Main Street program promoted the conversion of one -way to two -way streets, effectively declaring the method appropriate for historic streets but also effective enough to be an economic development tool. A transportation planner with 35 years experience, John D. Edwards, wrote for the Main Street News, "While a growing number of communities are opting for two -way traffic in their business districts and there is significant anecdotal evidence that positive changes occur after most street conversions, there has been limited research 135 on actual retail sales and property value increases. More economic data is needed to support the economic benefits of these conversions." 251 This thesis heeded Mr. Edwards' request and conduct a research study that statistically evaluated the success of the 1994 one -way to two -way conversion. In increasing property values on Upper King Street, the one -way to two -way conversion preserved the historical use, design, architecture, and importance of Charleston's most recognizable street. By including this level of qualitative and quantitative research, historic preservation can increase its acceptance and influence in the field of real estate development and appraisal. Additionally, the study of Upper King Street welcomes another profession into the conversation: transportation engineers. For the first part of the twentieth century the plans and actions of transportation engineers were the problem, today, they can be part of the solution for historic American downtowns. In fact, like the case of Upper King Street, it is essential to undo the previous one -way plans that accommodated the needs of motorist above all others, including pedestrians, business vitality, and the street life of downtowns. One -way streets have been shown to increase automobile speed, decrease pedestrian experience, and decrease business storefront visibility. In returning appropriately selected one -way streets back to two -way operation, street restoration, like buildings restoration, can be used to return a corridor to a more appropriate match for its historic use. Beyond typical economic redevelopment methods or historic preservation methods, 251 John D Edwards, Converting One -Way Streets to Two -Way Managing Traffic on Main Street, (Washington, D C The National Trust's Main Street Center, 2002) 136 successful revitalization projects require a comprehensive approach that includes diverse methods from diverse fields. This thesis has looked at the recent history of Upper King Street and determined that there was a series of systematic one -way transportation plans that contributed to the decline of the district. An appropriate method to reverse the negative effects includes the re- conversion of one -way streets to two -way operation. In analyzing the affects of a 1994 one -way to two -way conversion, it became apparent that historic research must adapt to new periods of significance, and start to include detailed research of the happenings of the mid and late twentieth century. Urban patterns and buildings in the modern style, and specifically modern commercial buildings, of which Upper King Street has several, are in need of fervent protection and preservation. The research conducted to this thesis and others like it will be the building blocks for historic researchers in the approaching times. The decline of American downtowns in the mid twentieth century has finally reached that all- important fifty year birthday, the age at which preservationist start to deem a building "historic." This distinction in age is essential to ensure that an appropriate amount of time has passed, and a fresh and hopefully, respectful perspective can be applied. It is now that the effects of America's greatest transportation plans and suburban settlement patterns of the past century can be viewed critically, and the resounding desire is to return downtowns to their previous and prosperous conditions. 137 Getting from corner of Elm & 9th Streets to Quick Lube at 990 White Street, Dubuque . 1296 1130 1134 1132 1126 1146 1100 z 340 0 A 1056 1048 1000 Current driving options with one -way streets. Proposed driving options with two -way streets. July 9, 2012 Look Both Ways: Restoring Two-Way Traffic to Main Street Kevin Firnstahl - Look Both Ways: Restoring Two -Way Traffic to Main Street Page 1 of 3 Forum I Main Street I Partners I Hello Dan I My Account I Logout From: <Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 8> Date: 7/11/2012 11 51 AM Subject: Look Both Ways Restoring Two -Way Traffic to Main Street Attachments: Part 001, Part 002, Part 003, Part 004, Part 005, Part 006, Part 007, Part 008, Part 009, Part 010, Part 011, Part 012, Part 013, Part 014, Part 015, Part 016, Part 017, Part 018, Part 019, Part 020, Part 021, Part 022, Part 023, Part 024, Part 025, Part 026, Part 027, Part 028, Part 029, Part 030, Part 031, Part 032 x National Trust for Hist oric Preservation WHAT IS PRESERVATION? I WHO WE ARE I WHAT WE DO SAVE A PLACE Email Share Print RSS Font A /A + /A ++ Look Both Ways: Restoring Two -Way Traffic to Main Street By John D Edwards and Linda Ghsson I From Main Street Story of the Week I November 30, 2011 x SOTW _11- 30- 11_LeesburgMainStreet Many factors combine to make Main Street economically successful One important aspect is the traffic pattern One -way streets are efficient but they are not customer friendly or easy to navigate - especially for tourists and infrequent customers Circulation becomes more complicated as motorists often have to drive a few blocks before they can turn around and get back to where they wanted to go A major concern of organizations working to improve traditional commercial districts is to boost retail sales, and, more specifically, to increase the visibility and accessibility of their offerings In this regard, making traffic circulation more "customer friendly" is a prerequisite to increasing the retail segment of the business district and appealing to investors and business owners who are interested in your Main Street district Retailers aren't the only businesses dependent on easy -to- understand traffic operations, however Service operations and professional offices also rely on a circulation system that is easy to understand and to navigate Another perception that affects the success of your commercial district is "Does it feel exciting? Are there lots of people ?" That indicates a certain degree of congestion One -way circulation is so efficient at moving traffic that the streets may feel empty! A commercial district needs to have a certain level of traffic congestion so that it appears busy How fast cars travel through your district is another issue Any successful Main Street district will have considerable pedestrian traffic, and where pedestrians are present, speed limits should be low -15 to 30 miles per hour One -way streets, especially one -way road pairs of 10 to 15 blocks in length, tend to encourage higher speeds, usually 35 to 40 mph Why Convert to Two -way Streets? When should a community consider converting a street or network of streets from one -way to two -way traffic? The most important consideration is whether it will help the commercial district revitalization effort If the area affected by the conversion is a retail district that is experiencing a comeback, then a conversion may be warranted If, however, the area adjacent to the one -way street is primarily office, warehousing, or industrial, with high peak -hour traffic, then a conversion may not be worth it Helping people protect, enhance and enjoy the places that matter to them Main Street News Main Street News Home Article List Story of the Week Main Street About Main Street Resources Main Street News Conferences & Trainings Consulting Services Bookstore National Main Street Awards Members Area Become a Member Main Street Jobs Contact Main Street OTHER RECENT NEWS file :I / /C:/Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Ternp/XPgipwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Look Both Ways: Restoring Two-Way Traffic to Main Street Page 2 of 3 Perhaps the most important reason for changing the traffic flow is to improve the economic well -being of the commercial district West Palm Beach, Florida, for example, saw $300 million in private investment after city hall invested $10 million in converting to two -way streets and improving the streetscape Lafayette, Indiana, instigated the change as a result of major transportation infrastructure projects The plan for converting the one -way streets was not without concerns about loss of parking spaces and the cost of installing new traffic signal lights and signs When the city did an actual traffic count, however, it found that the downtown didn't need so many traffic lights or stacking lanes After the conversion, downtown was "easier to get around," said Director of Development Sherry McLauchlan "Because it is our historic downtown and we are trying to build our tourism market, it is easier for out -of- towners to find their way around " )( SOTW_11 -30- 11_Oreg on CityLogo Downtown Oregon City is in the process of converting its Main Street back to a two -way street Based upon two years of work that included a range of downtown revitaltzation efforts, federal and Oregon Department of Transportation grant funding, as well as recommendations by numerous consultants, the city will stripe a new center line down Main Street in order to return the street to its original circulation flow A two -way Main Street will simplify the circulation system downtown and provide more efficient access to on- street parking and side streets in the downtown core Click here to view a video animation produced by Funnelbox Production Studios in downtown Oregon City that guides visitors through this new circulation pattern "A two -way Main Street works in downtown Oregon City because we're welcoming visitors off of 99E and making driving downtown a simpler and more intuitive process," said Lloyd Purdy, director of Main Street Oregon City "Downtown Oregon City is evolving into a retail and restaurant friendly marketplace, not just a center for creative professionals A two -way Main Street becomes a unifying characteristic of our downtown marketplace It's a physical connection that benefits all downtown " Should Your District Convert to a Two -way Main Street? What information do you need to decide on a street conversion/ The types and level of analysis depend on a variety of factors, including Street jurisdiction —Is the street under federal, state, or local Jurisdiction? Street widths— Two -way operation requires a minimum width of 24 feet, if there's parallel parking on both sides of the street, it should be at least 36 feet wide Daily and peak -hour traffic —For streets carrying more than 10,000 vehicles a day, make sure most of the traffic consists of local shoppers Adjacent building use — Streets lined primarily with retail stores are usually the prime candidates for conversion Pedestrian activity —If pedestrian traffic volume is less than 200 to 300 people an hour, a street conversion will probably produce minimal benefits x SOTW_11- 30- 11_Pedestrians Level of congestion —In commercial districts, an average wait of 60 seconds at intersections is acceptable, while vehicular speeds should be no more than 25 mph on retail streets to ensure the safety of pedestrians How the facilities relate to the local and regional transportation network— Proposed street conversions may depend on the way they fit within the regional roadway network Possible economic impacts— Street conversions to two -way traffic should be based upon real and anticipated economic benefits, such as reduced vacancy rates, increased retail sales and employment, increased pedestrian activity, and/or increased property tax assessments Check out Revitalizing Main Street A practitioner's guide to comprehensive commercial district revitalization for more information about managing traffic on Main Street Portions of this article were reprinted horn the National Trust Main Street Center publication, Revitalizing Main Street Email Share Print PSS Font A /A +IA ++ Who We Are Support Us How to Get in Touch Helping people protect, enhance file: ///C:/ Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Temp/XPgrpwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Look Both Ways: Restoring Two -Way Traffic to Main Street Page 3 of 3 History Donate Facebook Our Departments Membership Benefits Flickr Field Offices How Your Support Helps Twitter Trustees, Advisors and Staff Contact Us Partners and enjoy the places that matter to them 1785 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 2 003 6 -211 7 P 202 588 6000 T 800 944 6847 F 202 588 6038 Terms of Use I Pnvacy Advertise © 2012 National Trust for Historic Preservation All Rights Reserved A member of the International National Trusts Organisation (INTO) International National Trusts Organisation Powered by Convio nonprofit software file: ///C:/ Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Temp/XPgrpwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Kevin Firnstahl - Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Page 1 of 5 Forum I Main Street I Partners I Hello Dan I My Account I Logout From: <Saved by Windows Internet Explorer 8> Date: 7/11/2012 11 50 AM Subject: Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Attachments: Part 001, Part 002, Part 003, Part 004, Part 005, Part 006, Part 007, Part 008, Part 009, Part 010, Part 011, Part 012, Part 013, Part 014, Part 015, Part 016, Part 017, Part 018, Part 019, Part 020, Part 021, Part 022, Part 023, Part 024, Part 025, Part 026, Part 027, Part 028, Part 029, Part 030 x National Trust for Hist orio Preservation WHAT IS PRESERVATION? I WHO WE ARE I WHAT WE DO SAVE A PLACE Email Share Print RSS Font A /A + /A ++ Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Managing Traffic on Main Street By John D Edwards 1 From Main Street Story of the Week I June 2002 1 187 There has been a resurgence of interest in downtown redevelopment in the past two decades Whether this is the result of programs such as Main Street or simply a renewed interest in downtown from "baby boomers" and municipalities that now recognae the importance of the downtown tax base, it is happening Along with this "broader" interest in traditional commercial districts, we see more concern and interest in the 'nuts and bolts' of what makes a downtown actually work better One of those nuts and bolts is the downtown street system Downloads FC Download msnews- 2002 -06 tiff In the 1960s and '70s, the primary traffic issue for downtowns was how to reduce "congestion" and make traffic move faster, r e , provide maximum mobility In the late '80s and '90s, there was a realization that maybe some traffic congestion downtown is good Maybe we don't have to "give over" the entire commercial district to the automobile and make all systems subservient to vehicular mobility As a result of the resurgence of central business districts and the need to slow traffic to make the area more pedestrian friendly, we have begun to look at those operational techniques that cause high- volume and high -speed traffic One -way traffic is one of those systems that has come under recent scrutiny Why One Way? How did one -way streets become so popular downtown anyway, There were several problems that led to commercial districts adopting one -way traffic systems > Needed increases in capacity, > Preservation of on- street parking, > Increasing traffic, and > The lack of by -pass facilities for through traffic (motorists who didn't want to drive through downtown anyway) Increases in capacity were needed during the 1950s and '60s because of dramatic increases in travel As a result, there was a tendency to remove on- street parking to make more travel lanes, thereby giving preference to mobility By switching to one -way traffic, it was possible to preserve on- street parking in many districts while increasing the traffic- carrying capacity of the existing street network In the 1960s and 70s, traffic continued to increase on main street because of the growth of urbanized Helping people protect, enhance and enjoy the places that matter to them Main Street News Main Street News Home Article List Story of the Week Main Street About Main Street Resources Main Street News Conferences & Trainings Consulting Services Bookstore National Main Street Awards Members Area Become a Member Main Street Jobs Contact Main Street OTHER RECENT NEWS file :I / /C:/Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Temp/XPgipwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Page 2 of 5 areas, although retail growth in central business districts (CBD) had begun to decline By the 1980s, not only had retail growth declined but other downtown land uses were relocating as well Finally, the construction of many bypass facilities both as a part of, and in addition to, the growth of the interstate highway system, put a virtual stop to traffic growth in most CBDs, and many downtowns experienced actual declines in traffic volume on some of their streets Given this history, why even be concerned about converting one -way streets? Making Main Street "Customer Friendly" Many factors combine to make main street economically successful One important, but often overlooked, aspect is the traffic pattern One -way streets are efficient but they are not customer friendly for people coming downtown to shop two or three times a month For these infrequent visitors, the downtown circulation system needs to be as easy to use and as easy to understand as possible A major concern of organizations working to revitalize traditional commercial districts is to improve retail sales, and, more specifically, to boost the visibility and accessibility of the retail segment of the district's complement of government, services, and retail In this regard, making the circulation system more "customer friendly" is a prerequisite to increasing the retail segment of downtown and appealing to Investors and merchants who are Interested in coming back to main street Retailers aren't the only businesses dependent on easy -to- understand traffic operations, however Service operations and professional offices also need a circulation system that is easy to understand and to navigate, and in most small to medium -sized communities (10,000 to 50,000 in population), two -way streets are preferable One -way streets increase travel Because most one -way systems do not allow motorists to travel directly to every destination, there are some locations that one must drive past, turn around, and then drive back in order to gain access So in any downtown grid, there will be "dead blocks" -- meaning from an access standpoint, they require circuitous routing to arrive at a destination located in that block (see Figure 1) Another perception that affects the success of downtown retailing is "does it feel exciting, are there lots of people "'Which means a certain degree of congestion One -way circulation is so efficient at moving traffic that the streets may feel emptyi Thus a commercial district needs to have a certain level of traffic congestion so that it appears busy How fast cars travel on downtown streets is another issue Any successful main street district will have considerable pedestrian traffic, and where pedestrians are present, operating speeds should be low -- 15 to 20 miles per hour One -way streets, especially one -way road pairs of 10 to 15 blocks in length, tend to encourage higher operating speeds, usually in the range of 35 to 40 mph Why Convert? When should a community consider converting a street or network of streets from one -way to two -way traffic? The most important consideration is whether it will help the revitalization effort If the area affected by the conversion is a retail district that is experiencing a comeback, then a conversion may be warranted If, however, the area adjacent to the one -way street is primarily office, warehousing, or industrial, with high peak -hour traffic, then a conversion may not be worth it Perhaps the most important reason for changing the traffic flow of a downtown street is to improve the economic well -being of the commercial district A survey of 25 towns and cities that have converted their main streets show that many have experienced significant reductions in vacant floor space after the conversion (See Table 1 ) All of the communities surveyed reported positive results after converting their one -way streets to two - way traffic, and many reported substantial private Investments stimulated by conversions that were coupled with streetscape projects West Palm Beach, for example, reported $300 million in private investment in areas where city hall had invested $10 million in public funding Changing the downtown environment so that It better serves pedestrians is another major reason for converting one -way streets In several communities, operating speeds were reduced from 30 to 45 mph to 20 to 25 mph Slowing traffic has the advantage of reducing noise, water and snow splash, and fumes -- all problems for people walking on the sidewalk file: ///C :/Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Ternp/XPgipwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Page 3 of 5 An even more important benefit is the increase in pedestrian safety In the booklet, MAIN STREET -When a Highway Runs Through It, published by the Washington State Department of Transportation, speed is related to driver perception and the severity of injuries at various speeds For instance, at 40 mph, the driver's focus is on the roadway at a distance, at 30 mph, the driver begins to see things at the road's edges, and at 20 mph, the foreground comes into focus At 15 mph, the motorist sees pedestrians and other elements on adjacent buildings The booklet also points out the chances of fatality to a pedestrian who is struck at various speeds at 40 mph, the chance of death is 85%, at 30 mph, it is 45%, while at 20 mph, the chance of a fatal injury is 15% Another factor to consider is the type of traffic flow If it is mostly throughway traffic with few people stopping at downtown destinations, then the conversion may have little or no impact on revitalization of district Along with type of traffic is the amount of traffic If traffic volumes exceed 15,000 vehicles per day (vpd) on each of the one -way streets and if there are numerous cross streets with no suitable parallel or bypass routes, the conversion to two -way may increase congestion to unacceptable levels and actually deter shoppers A final consideration is street width, and its impact on on- street parking and off - street parking access /egress If streets are narrow, there may be a significant loss of parking Streets less than 22 feet wide are not good candidates for two -way operations, left-turn movements will cause congestion For off - street parking lots and garages, the access design of the entrance /exit may require substantial reconstruction to accommodate a change to two -way operation Another potential expense to consider is the cost of changing traffic signals and signs to accommodate the conversion These changes can be expensive, especially if electrical wires are underground In Greensboro, N C , for example, the estimate to convert one street was $30,000 per intersection What You Need to Know What information do you need to determine the desirability of a street conversion and where do you get It? The types and level of analysis depend on a variety of factors, including > the jurisdiction under which the street(s) operate, > street widths, > amount of daily and peak -hour traffic, > adjacent building use, > pedestrian activity, > level of congestion, > possible economic impacts, and > how the facilities relate to the local and regional transportation network Street Jurisdiction Street jurisdiction refers to the legal authority under which the street operates Is it a federal, state, or local route? If it is a federal or state route, it will be necessary to get approval to make the conversion and the studies required may be fairly rigorous If the street is under local jurisdiction, the conversion will be under local control, and the decision may be dependent only on traffic volumes and parking needs Several streets in Green Bay, Wis , and other small downtowns have been converted to two -way operation with little study or negative impact Street Width and Lane Use Perhaps the most important consideration is street width Obviously, two -way operation requires a minimum width of 24 feet If there is parallel parking on both sides of the street, the required width may be 36 to 38 feet, and with angle parking on both sides, the width expands to 64 to 68 feet These widths do not provide any left -turn lanes, so if there is a heavy amount of left -turn traffic, additional width may be required Table 2, below, gives minimum curb -to -curb widths for various parking and traffic lane configurations As you can see, angle parking increases minimum required widths considerably due not only to the depth of the parking aisle but also the maneuvering space required Daily and Peak- Hour Traffic The amount of traffic, both daily and during peak hours, must also be considered For streets carrying more than 10,000 vehicles per day, make sure that most of the traffic consists of local shoppers, file :I / /C:/Users /ktirnsta /AppData/ Local /Ternp/XPgipwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Page 4 of 5 otherwise severe complaints will ensue Peak -hour volumes of more than 500 vehicles per lane can cause considerable delay due to the new left-turn movements generated by the conversion If you plan to convert streets with high traffic volumes, look for alternative routes with surplus capacity that can be used by drivers who aren't planning to stop at any of the businesses on the converted streets Adjacent Building Use Building use along the street is another important factor The basic reason for converting a street to two - way traffic is to make the circulation system easier to understand and use For people who work or live downtown, this may not be an important issue For shoppers, it's a different story, two -way streets can help them reach their destinations more quickly and easily Thus, streets with predominantly retail uses are usually the prime candidates for conversion Another significant building use that can affect two -way conversions is the presence of a parking garage or deck Parking structures specifically designed for one -way operations may require redesign and reconstruction of their entrances and exits to accommodate the new traffic flow While parking lots may also need modification, changes to surface lots are, in general, much easier to make than alterations to parking structures Pedestrian Activity Improving the pedestrian environment on adjacent sidewalks is one of the major reasons for converting one -way streets to two -way operations This can occur by reducing traffic speeds, noise, rain and snow splash, and vehicular - pedestrian conflicts To obtain significant benefits through the above actions, there must be either existing or anticipated pedestrian traffic on the sidewalks If the buildings along the street do not generate significant pedestrian activity, the conversion will generate fewer pedestrian benefits Areas in which pedestrian traffic volume is less than 200 to 300 people an hour will probably experience minimal benefits Pedestrian studies that include existing counts of activity on downtown sidewalks can help determine whether a conversion will benefit the district Levels of Congestion Typically, traffic engineers and transportation planners strive for intersection levels of service of "C" or above, which means vehicular delays of 30 seconds or less Most downtowns, however, must be willing to accept higher levels of service because pedestrians are present and drivers are turning or pulling into or out of parking spaces The wait at intersections is less important because conditions in the middle of a block may exert more control over vehicular delay than traffic signals For commercial districts, especially retail areas, levels of service of "D" or "E" are acceptable this means average waits of up to 60 seconds at intersections Capacity and level of service analyses are essential studies for any proposed street conversion Levels of traffic congestion affect operating speeds as well From the standpoint of pedestrian safety, vehicular speeds of more than 25 miles per hour for retail streets are undesirable On- street parking will slow the speed of traffic as well, making it desirable for the retail areas of main street districts Conversions and the Regional Transportation Network One -way to two -way conversions may depend on the way the proposed streets fit within the regional roadway network When considering a conversion, it is necessary to look at the network and see how a change will affect traffic operations regionally For instance, if a freeway interchange system is designed to operate with the one -way system in the commercial district, it may not be possible to make a change On the other hand, if there are parallel routes to which'Through" traffic can be diverted, a conversion may be possible In any event, studies should be conducted to determine how much of the traffic flow is "through" and how much is "local " Truck traffic is another consideration Is there a high volume of truck traffic on the streets to be converted? If so, thought must be given to the diversion of truck operations to a parallel route in order to reduce congestion on the proposed two -way street The Benefits of Street Conversions Street conversions to two -way traffic should be based upon real and anticipated economic benefits, such as reduced vacancy rates, increased retail sales and employment, Increased pedestrian activity, and/or Increased property tax assessments While a growing number of communities are opting for two -way file :l / /C:/Users /kfirnsta /AppData/ Local /Temp/XPgipwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012 Converting One -way Streets to Two -way Page 5 of 5 traffic in their business districts and there is significant anecdotal evidence that positive changes occur after most street conversions, there has been limited research on actual retail sales and property value increases More economic data is needed to support the economic benefits of these conversions John D Edwards has more than 35 years experience in traffic, planning, and parking He worked as a transportation planner for the City of Cincinnati, as a project engineer for the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and as a pricipal in consulting firms Email Share Print P^55 Font A A +IA ++ Who We Are Support Us How to Get in Touch History Donate Facebook Our Departments Membership Benefits Flickr Field Offices How Your Support Helps Twitter Trustees, Advisors and Staff Contact Us Partners Helping people protect, enhance and enjoy the places that matter to them 1785 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC 2 003 6 -211 7 P 202 588 6000 T 800 944 6847 F 202 588 6038 Terms of Use I Pnvacy Advertise © 2012 National Trust for Historic Preservation All Rights Reserved A member of the International National Trusts Organisation (INTO) D International National Trusts Organisation Powered by Convio nonprofit software file: ///C:/ Users /kf"irnsta /AppData/ Local /Temp/XPgrpwise /4FFD9D25DBQ DODBQ P01... 7/11/2012