Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Hale‘iwa Improvement District ProjectHale‘iwa, North Shore, O‘ahu
October 10, 2017
Public Informational MeetingEnvironmental Impact Statement Preparation Notice
Waialua Elementary School67-020 Waialua Beach Road
Waialua, HI 96791
Department of Design and ConstructionCity and County of Honolulu
Meeting Purpose / Desired Outcomes
• Community and landowners understand the alternatives, issues and process.
• Obtain community and landowner input on the ID alternatives and on environmental, social and technical issues for evaluation in the EIS.
• Answer questions about the project, the ID and the EIS process.
2
Introductions
City and County of HonoluluRobert Kroning, P.E., DDC Director Ann Shimatsu, P.E., DDC Project Manager, Civil DivisionBob Sarae, P.E., DDC Civil DivisionHarrison Rue, DPP, Community Building and TOD Administrator
R. M. Towill CorporationJimmy Yamamoto, P.E., Vice PresidentJim Niermann, AICP LEED AP, Principal PlannerGordon Ring, P.E., LEED AP, Principal EngineerMichele Leong, Planner
3
Opening Remarks4
Housekeeping
• Sign-in Sheet
• Meeting Documentation
• Comment Forms & Box
• Refreshments
• Restrooms
5
Meeting Agenda
• Presentation by the Project Team.• Project Update
• Conceptual Alternatives for EIS
• EISPN Comment Period
• Full-group Discussion / Q & A
6
Ground Rules
• Stick to the agenda.
• Save questions for the end. Reference slide #.
• Listen respectfully.
• Respond to ideas and issues, not individuals.
7
Hale‘iwa Improvement District Project Area8
Improvement District
City Council Resolution 09-338, CD11. Walkways2. Landscaping3. Undergrounding Utilities
ROH Chapter 14, Articles 23 to 29Establishes Improvement District Process
9
Improvement District Process
• Costs shared by the City and adjacent landowners.
• Utility companies share a portion of utility costs.
• Basis for cost assessment may include:–Street frontage / lot area–Land use–Type of improvements–Assessed value of property
• The intent is to make it work.
10
Complete Streets Ordinance
• Requires the City to employ a multi-modal approach to roadway projects.
• Goal is to balance needs of pedestrians, bicycles, transit and motor vehicles.
• Requires multi-modal traffic study.
• ROH Section 14-33
11
12
Community Involvement, Agency Consultation
Background ResearchSpecial Studies
Community InterviewsAgency Consultation
Workshops#1 & #2
Prelim. AlternativesMulti‐modal Study
Final EIS Preparation
Design Meetings
Draft EIS
Pre‐Draft EIS Meeting(s) Alternatives Review
Community Involvement / EIS Process
Site Conditions AnalysisEngineering Analysis
Preliminary Design Concepts
EIS Prep Notice
Draft EIS Meeting(s)Public Review Period
Pre‐Final EIS MeetingID Alternative Final EIS / ROD
Current Status
• EISPN Comment Period
• Conceptual Alternatives
• Multi-modal Traffic Study – in progress
• Agency Consultation – ongoing
• Special Studies for EIS – ongoing
13
Key Feedback So Far
• Strong support for pedestrian improvements
• Preserve rural character and human scale
• Keep the ID improvements simple
• Preference to keep the road as-is, no left-turn lanes
• No strong preference for overhead vs. underground utilities (except costs)
• Parking – concern over loss of street frontage parking, support for centralized parking
• Concern about ID costs and allocation
• Concern about losing land to the project
• Construction impacts – hard on small businesses
14
Hale‘iwa Improvement District15
16Hale‘iwa Improvement District
Existing Conditions• Two-lane, rural commercial street
• ROW width varies from 30’ to 50’
• No existing walkways except in isolated locations. No bike lanes.
• Buildings located near roadway
• Accustomed street-front parking
• Trees and utilities located near roadway
• Bus service through town – 13 bus stops
• Congested conditions during daytime (visitor traffic, busses)
• 60-foot road widening setback
17
• Low-Speed Road• Drainage – maintain exist. flow pattern• Multi-modal design - improve experience for
pedestrians, bicyclists and transit• Consider Complete Streets features • Dimension Guidelines
– 22’ Roadway– 6’ Walkway (8’ at bus stops and commercial core)– 5’ Bike lane (If Provided)– 4’ Buffer for landscaping, drainage and furniture
• Overhead and Underground Utilities
Design Criteria18
• Conceptual Alternatives– Alt 1 – 65’-69’ ROW– Alt 2 – 42’ ROW– Alt 3 – 52’ to 56’
• Complete Streets Treatments– Raised Crosswalk– Bike Lanes– Furniture zone / buffer– Traffic Circles
• Parking – perpendicular, parallel, angled
19Design Summary
20Typical Road Sections65’ to 69’ ROW
Dimensions may be modified in final design.
21Typical Road Sections42’ ROW
Dimensions may be modified in final design.
22Typical Road Sections52’ to 56’ ROW
Dimensions may be modified in final design.
Alternative 1: 65’ to 69’ ROW 23
Alternative 1: 65’ to 69’ ROW 24
25Alternative 2: 42’ ROW
26Alternative 2: 42’ ROW
27Alternative 3: 52’ to 56’ ROW
28Alternative 3: 52’ to 56’ ROW
Complete Streets• The City is required by ordinance to consider
complete streets principles in transportation project planning
• Improves mobility for all street users.
• Good for business.
• Features that might work in Hale‘iwa:– Bicycle Facilities– Raised Crosswalks– Furniture Zone / Buffer– Parklets– Traffic Circles
29
Bicycle Facilities
• 5-ft. wide bike lane, separated from walkway
• Sharrows – share the travel lane with motor vehicles
• Improve bicycling convenience and comfort to encourage less reliance on motor vehicles
• Connect to regional bike path system
• Equitable access for kids, teens, workers
30
Bicycle Facilities31
Raised Crosswalks
• Table-top crosswalk across travel lane.
• Raised intersection.
• Provides traffic calming (speed table).
• Improves visibility for drivers and pedestrians.
• Creates landmark.
32
Raised Crosswalks33
Furniture Zone / Buffer
• 4-foot wide area to provide separation from travel way and pedestrian walkway.
• Used for:– Landscaping – Drainage– Utilities– Street Furniture (benches, signs, trash cans)
34
Furniture Zone / Buffer35
Furniture Zone / Buffer36
Furniture Zone / Buffer37
Parklet
• Parklet– Seating, landscape features, shade/shelter.– Provides social/respite space, creates a
landmark.– Can be customized to fit into available space,
minimizing impacts to the adjacent area.
38
39
Parklet
40
Parklet
Traffic Circles
• Eliminates stop-control, allows continuous flow.• Alternative to left turn lanes.• Allows cars to make a U-turn instead of left turns.• Improves motor vehicle movement and
pedestrian access into adjacent properties.• Minimizes turn conflicts.• Creates a landmark/entry feature.
41
Traffic Circles – Hale`iwa Road42
Traffic Circles – Hale`iwa Road43
Parking
• Space availability – ROW, physical constraints.• Safety / integration of parking with walkway
design. • Convenience / business needs (customers,
loading, deliveries).• Design:
– Perpendicular– Parallel– Angled
44
Parking45
Parking46
Street frontage parking: Parallel parking.
Pā‘ia, Maui Makawao, Maui
Parking47
Street frontage parking: angled parking.
San Francisco, CA Makawao, Maui
Reverse angle “safety” parking Nose-in angle parking
48
• 13 Bus stops – create breaks in traffic that facilitate left turns and pedestrian crossings.
• 3 bus stops are candidates for removal due to low ridership and proximity to adjacent bus stops.
B B
BB B
BB
BB B
BB
B
Bus Stops
Alternatives Cost Comparison49
• Cost categories:– Construction mobilization/demobilization– Demolition– Utility Relocation – electrical/telcom, water, lighting– Paving, Concrete Walkways & Driveways– Drainage improvements– Landscaping and street furnishings– Land acquisition– Tie-in to property frontage– Building retrofit
Order of magnitude costs (subject to change pending design):Alternatives Cost Comparison
50
Cost Category Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Construction Mob, Traffic Control $3,250,000 $1,710,000 $2,375,000Travel way Construction $5,650,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000Bike Lane Construction $1,120,000 $0 $1,120,000Walkway Construction $3,030,000 $2,440,000 $2,590,000Furniture Zone – landscaping & features $600,000 $300,000 $300,000Utility Relocation $4,340,000 $1,990,000 $2,530,000Drainage Improvements $6,425,000 $2,560,000 $3,000,000Contingency (20%) $4,885,000 $2,100,000 $2,685,000
Total $29,300,000 $12,600,000 $16,100,000
Does not include costs for:• Land / Easement Acquisition• Building Upgrades / Retrofit• Tie-ins to existing property frontageUndergrounding Electrical cost estimate = $14,200,000Traffic Circle cost estimate = $600,000 (excluding land acquisition and
property adjustments)
Basis for ID Cost Allocation51
• Street frontage / lot area• Land use / zoning• Type of improvements• Value of existing, impacted improvements• Assessed market value of property• Utility company cost-share
Project Schedule52
Complete Project Alternative Designs for Inclusion in EIS
Summer 2018
Complete EIS Summer 2019
Complete Preliminary ID Report Fall 2020
Council Action on the Preliminary ID Report
2021
Key Project Milestones:
Q & A
• Listen respectfully.• Respond to ideas and issues, not
individuals• One person speaks at a time.• Allow everyone to speak once before
speaking a second time.• Keep comments and discussion concise
and to the point.
53
Q & A54
What’s Next?
• EISPN Comment Period – October 23, 2017• Finalize multi-modal study and alternatives.• Prepare Draft EIS for publication Fall 2018.• Work with City agencies to review alternatives.• Next community meeting summer 2018.
55
EISPN Comments Due:October 23, 2017
Ms. Ann Shimatsu, P.E., Project ManagerDepartment of Design and Construction
City and County of Honolulu650 South King Street, 15th Floor
Honolulu, HI 96813
56
Contact:
James Niermann, AICP, LEED APPlanning Project Coordinator
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (808) 842-1133
R. M. Towill Corporation2024 North King Street Suite 200
Honolulu, Hawaii 96819
57
MAHALO
Department of Design and ConstructionCity and County of Honolulu