I n t e g r a t e d C o m m u n i t y S u s t a i n a b i l i t y P l a n

A u g u s t 2 0 1 1

C o r p u s C h r i s t i

M o b i l i t y C o n c e p t s

M a s t e r I m p l e m e n t a t i o n M a t r i x

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents 01020508111417192123

Introduction

Downtown Transit Circulator Concept

Bike/Pedestrian Treatments

Hike—Bike Trails Concept Plan

Roundabout Implementation Plan

Road Diet Implementation Plan

Corridor Mobility Concepts: Leopard Street/Annaville

Corridor Mobility Concepts: Lipes Boulevard

Corridor Mobility Concepts: Ocean Drive

Corridor Mobility Concepts: Old Brownsville Road

Introduction In April of 2010, the City of Corpus Christi received $2.7M in direct allocation Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds from the Department of Energy (DOE) as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The largest of the nine projects funded by the EECBG grant was the creation of an Integrated Community Energy Efficiency/Sustainability Plan and Implementation Program. One critical part of the planning effort was consideration of strategies to enhance the efficiency with which people and goods move within the community. Sustainable mobility solutions provide context-sensitive, multimodal transportation choices that support economic growth and social equity while protecting natural resources and promoting public health and safety.

A community can make significant progress toward achieving these objectives by designing and building Complete streets—streets that accommodate the needs of all users no matter their age or ability, and allow for choice in mode of travel. Using key roadways and corridors associated with the Destination Nodes as examples, the planning team made specific recommendations as to how various complete street concepts might be applied, including:

Downtown Transit Circulator In order to promote economic growth and social equity through transportation alternatives, the planning team developed preliminary concept plans for a downtown transit circulator. Such a system would be a key step in creating a vibrant downtown district because it would provide connections to key destinations and enhance walkability.

Bike/Pedestrian Treatments at Intersections Busy intersections and midblock crossing locations are often intimidating places for bicyclists and pedestrians. As such, in the interest of enhancing walkability and promoting overall community livability, the planning team provided a range of design alternatives, or treat-ments, to create safer, more compact crossing locations. These model treatments could apply to a number of locations around the com-munity.

Hike/Bike Trails Hike and bike trails provide transportation alternatives and recreational opportunities and promote public health and wellness. As such, the planning team identified potential routes and facilities for non-motorized connections between key community locations. Connec-tions include on-street bike lanes as well as existing natural land features, utility corridors, and other open space that might become part of a trail network.

Roundabouts Modern roundabouts can significantly improve traffic flow and safety at intersections. Because they reduce speeds while keeping traffic moving, roundabouts help meet environmental quality as well as livability objectives because they reduce fuel consumption and emis-sions. Roundabouts also serve as landmark features, thus creating a strong sense of place, and they are very friendly for pedestrians and cyclists because they provide refuge areas and encourage slow speeds. Using one of the Destination Nodes as a case example, the plan¬ning team provided design considerations and outline key steps for retrofit roundabout installation.

Road Diets The road diet concept involves removing unneeded travel lanes from target roadways and rededicating the space for other travel modes or uses, such as on-street bike lanes or parking. Road diet projects promote public health and safety by reducing vehicle speeds and creating a safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists, all while making traffic operations more efficient. As part of this planning effort, the planning team identified candidate roadway segments for road diets and suggested key steps for implementation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanDOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT

The Downtown Vision Plan highlighted the need for infi ll and new

development along with streetscape improvements on the Schatzel

Street, Peoples Street, and Chaparral Street corridors.

Various places are illustrated within the proposed Destination

Bayfront, extending roughly between Coopers Alley and Furman

Avenue, and centered at the Zocalo, the “central square” located on

the site of the former Coliseum extending across to the existing jetty.

The 2006 Downtown Redevelopment Committee (DRC) Report established a vision for Downtown Corpus Christi: “Downtown Corpus Christi is a safe, clean, pedestrian friendly community comprised of a central business district, arts and culture, sports and entertainment ar-eas. This unique, vibrant waterfront community will provide local residents, tourists, and families opportunities to enjoy its fi ne restaurants, shops and residential facilities.”

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

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

CONTEXT

FUNCTIONS / PURPOSEThere are two primary functions of streetcar systems:

• Connecting

° Pedestrians are the primary riders

° Short trips in urban districts are made more efficient

° Activities and destinations are linked

• Shaping

° Redevelopment initiatives are encouraged

° Retail and active uses are enhanced

° Public/private investment is maximized

POTENTIAL BENEFITS• Provide effective linkage between activity centers / districts

• Create one or more park-once districts/address event-driven parking

• Support redevelopment and infil l opportunities

• Create a sense of place

T YPICAL STREETCAR PARAMETERS • Run by overhead electric power (catenary or string wire)

• Run in-street on steel rails, generally sharing traffic lanes

• Typically 33% of the cost of and about 65% of passenger capacity of l ight rail

• Total costs typical range from $20-25 million per track mile, including vehicles, electrification, and maintenance facility

• Typical starter system is approximately 2.5 miles, with an initial fleet of 4-5 vehicles

• Can be built quickly with track construction averaging 3-4 weeks per 700-foot length of track

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

• Kenosha, WI - Initial investment of $6.2 million, with development investment of $150 million, resulting in a return on investment (ROI) of 2,319%.

• Little Rock, AR - Initial investment of $19.6 million with development investment of $200 million, resulting in a ROI of 920%.

• Tampa, FL - Initial investment of $48 million, with development investment of $1.5 bill ion ($600 million public, $900 million private), resulting in a ROI of 1,970%.

• Portland, OR - Initial investment and first extension if $73 million with development investment of $2.4 bill ion, resulting in a ROI of 3,288%.

STREETCAR 101

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT

DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT

Parking

Structure

Mix-used/

Eco Community

Opportunity

New Green

Downtown Gateway

Re

-alig

ned

US

Ro

ute

18

1

Uptown

Transit Hub

Industrial Canal

Corpus

Christi Bay

Str

en

gth

en

Sta

ple

s S

tre

et

en

treet

Mix-used

Residential

Opportunity

Mix-used

Residential

Opportunity

Mix-used

Residential

OpportunityGreen Comanche Street

En

ha

nce

Gre

en

Bu

ff

S.E.A. Town

Expansion

Parking

Structure

Institutional

Opportunity

High Density

Residential

Opportunity

Str

ee

tca

r O

pp

ort

un

ity

Streetcar Opportunity

Str

ee

tca

r O

pp

ort

un

ity

Streetcar Opportunity

Uptown District

Downtown District

S.E.A. Town

District

DestinationBayfrontDistrict

Initial PhaseLater Phase ExtensionPotential Station

LeopardPeoples

Starr

Taylor

Twigg

Mann

Power

Resaca

Ca

ran

cah

ua

Ta

nca

hu

a

Sta

ple

s

Ch

ap

arr

al

Me

squ

ite

Harbor Dr

Wa

ter

Schatzel

Kinney

John Sartain

Sh

ore

lin

e

Wa

ter

Park Ave

Industrriiii

Potential Maintenance FacilityParking

Structur

al Ca

S

Expa

aaaaa

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

Potential Streetcar Corridors

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

Starter Line

• Length = 2.3 miles with 9 proposed stations

• Connect the Uptown and Downtown districts

• Link the Uptown Transit Hub on Staples Street, City Hall, County Courthouse, Library, and Historic Downtown.

• Route: Down the Bluff via Lipan Street to John Sartain Street and up the Bluff via Schatzel Street to Leopard Street

Northern Extension to SEA Town

• Length = 1.8 mile with 6 proposed stations

• Connect Downtown and SEA Town districts

• Link downtown bars/restaurants with sports, entertainment, and arts venues north of downtown such as American Bank Center, Whataburger Field, Art Museum of South Texas, Museum of Science and History,

Harbor Playhouse, and Asian Culture Museum

• Route: Use couplet of Chaparral Street/Water Street, transitioning to Chaparral Street/Mesquite Street from Heritage Park to the north

• Potential maintenance facility to be located in SEA Town (although streetcars would need to be transported to this facility via truck under the proposed starter l ine configuration)

Future Extension South to Destination Bayfront

• Length = 1.0 mile with 4 proposed stations

• Potential redevelopment opportunities along Chaparral Street/Water Street in vicinity of Destination Bayfront

• Route: Use couplet of Chaparral Street/Water Street with transition to Water Street/Shoreline Boulevard

• Although not shown on the route alignment graphic, this future southern extension could also potentially be extended further to the south beyond Park Avenue to Elizabeth Street in order to provide connections to

Christus Spohn Hospital Shoreline, the Holiday Inn (and other hotels), and Cole Park.

TRANSIT CIRCULATOR ALIGNMENT DEVELOPMENT AND PHASING

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanDOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT

DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CIRCULATOR CONCEPT

IMPLEMENTATION FEASIBILITY STUDYFunding

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

• FTA “Livable Communities” and TCSP grants (Little Rock)

• State grants and appropriations (Seattle, Winston-Salem, Charlotte and Miami)

• Local option sales tax (Miami, Charlotte)

• Local General Fund appropriations (Little Rock, Galveston)

• Flexed STP funds (Little Rock)

• Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) grant funding (Tampa)

The next step towards implementing a Downtown Transit Circulator is to complete a feasibility study. Such a study should include the fol-lowing primary elements:

• Concept Development and Refinement

° Develop and evaluate transit districts, service areas, and markets

° Identify population and employment concentrations and opportunities/constraints

° Evaluate the most feasible routes for initial starter systems

° Evaluate additional longer term phases and potential vehicle/vessel options

° Review major utility impacts

° Evaluate area parking impacts and opportunities

° Develop conceptual operation/maintenance plan and facility locations and concepts

° Identify and map development opportunities

° Prepare conceptual alignment plans

• Planning and Project Development

° Develop preliminary sketch-level ridership estimates

° Evaluate and quantify development impacts and potential revenue generation

° Identify possible plan and ordinance changes needed for project implementation

° Determine environmental requirements for project implementation

° Estimate capital and operating/maintenance costs

° Review and evaluate funding opportunities, including local revenue tools

° Develop implementation action list

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanBIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS

RAISED CROSSINGSRaised crosswalks, either with or with-

out the median refuge, visually cue

the drivers to the pedestrian path and

act as speed humps in slowing traffi c.

Raised crossings might be considered

on minor or residential collector streets,

where traffi c calming is needed in the

area of a pedestrian crossing location.

PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACONSPedestrian Hybrid Beacons (also

known as HAWK crossings) can be used

in locations where a full traffi c signal

is not warranted. The HAWK consists

of a standard traffi c signal RED-RED

over YELLOW format. The unit is dark

until activated by a pedestrian. When

pedestrians wish to cross the street,

they press a button which activates a

warning FLASHING YELLOW light on

the main street. The indication then changes to a SOLID YELLOW advising drivers to prepare to

stop. The signal then displays a DUAL SOLID RED and shows the pedestrian a WALK symbol. The

beacon then displays an ALTERNATING FLASHING RED and the pedestrian is shown a FLASHING

DON’T WALK with a “countdown” signal advising them of the time left to cross. The 2009 MUTCD

contains guidance on when this type of crossing may be appropriate, including the following:

If a traffi c control signal is not justifi ed under the signal warrants of Chapter 4C and if gaps in

traffi c are not adequate to permit pedestrians to cross, or if the speed for vehicles approaching on

the major street is too high to permit pedestrians to cross, or if pedestrian delay is excessive, the

need for a pedestrian hybrid beacon should be considered on the basis of an engineering study

that considers major-street volumes, speeds, widths, and gaps in conjunction with pedestrian

volumes, walking speeds, and delay.

OVERHEAD SIGNS & SIDE MOUNTED BEACONSStandard overhead signs and side

mounted beacons are used as warn-

ing devices to alert motorists of the

crossing area and to warn drivers to

yield to those in the crosswalk.

RRFBSRectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons

(RRFB) have shown great promise in

increasing the percentage of motor-

ists who yield to pedestrians. The lights

are mounted immediately below the

standard pedestrian crossing warning

signs placed at the crosswalk (on both

the outside of the road and within the

median). The City of St. Petersburg,

Florida has experimented with these

signs at numerous midblock crossing locations on four-lane roadways and has found that mo-

torists yield to crossing pedestrians over 82% of the time, compared to an average of only 11%

with side-mounted round fl ashing beacons. These RRFBs and warning signs should be supple-

mented with advance pedestrian warning signs and advance yield lines placed approx. 20-50

feet in advance of the crosswalk.

RAISED MEDIAN WITH REFUGESeparate confl icts in time and location

through use of median islands. Raised

medians create a refuge for crossing

pedestrians, allowing them a ‘safe’

resting point and allowing them to

cross the roadway in two stages. Use

of these islands becomes more impor-

tant at higher volumes and speeds.

The crossing refuge may be raised, or

may be fl ush with the roadway.

STAGGERED Z CROSSINGSSimilar to an angled crossing this

crossing occurs at a lower volume side

street. In this type of crossing, the side

street travel is restricted to right in/

right out only movements, and the

crossing occurs on the upstream side

of the cross street so that the pedes-

trian movement does not confl ict with

the right out movement. This type of

crossing might be desired on a road-

way with a high number of cross streets and driveways, but with wide spacing between signalized

intersections.

STAGGERED OR ANGLED CROSSING WITH REFUGEAngling the crossing through the me-

dian or island forces the pedestrian

(or bicyclist) to “face” the oncoming

traffi c. Angle the crosswalk opening

within refuge islands by 45 degrees

toward traffi c to force pedestrians to

look toward drivers before going for-

ward across the far-side travel lane.

INPAVEMENT LIGHTSPedestrian actuated, fl ashing, in-

pavement warning lights illuminate

when activated by a pedestrian cross-

ing or desiring to cross at a particular

location.

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

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

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanBIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS

CHANNELIZED RIGHT TURN LANE WITH PEDESTRIAN REFUGEExcessively wide intersections increase

the amount of time needed for a pe-

destrian to safely cross and discourage

pedestrian use. Right turn channelizing

islands (sometimes called “pork chops”)

minimize pedestrian crossing times

and distances, in some cases from 120-

160 feet to only 50-60 feet. At signal-

ized intersections, the use of right turn

islands also reduces the required pedestrian signal clearance interval time (fl ashing don’t walk)

due to the shorter crossing distance. Many existing right turn lanes are not safe for pedestrians.

One contemporary strategy (sometimes referred to as “Australian rights” or “Gap Acceptance Right

Turns”) provides tighter angles, better pedestrian visibility and crossing safety, and improved mo-

torist sightlines. For crossings of channelized right turn lanes where motorist yielding behavior

may be problematic, raised speed tables between the edge of the roadway and the island may

be an appropriate treatment. Raised crossings at these locations have proven to increase the in-

stances of motorists yielding to pedestrians and slow speeds in advance of right turns.

• Alert motorists to potential pedestrian conflict

areas.

• Increase motorists yielding to pedestrians.

• Enhance motorists’ recognition of intersections.

• Assist people with visual impairment in their

crossings.

• Attract pedestrians to the best crossing places

with the most appropriate sight distances

RAISED INTERSECTIONA raised intersection is similar to a raised

crosswalk, except that the entire inter-

section is elevated rather than just the

crosswalk area. This creates a vertical

traffi c calming installation used to slow

traffi c through an intersection and plac-

es pedestrians and vehicles on the same

plane. This provides a safety advantage

for pedestrians, as it puts them on “equal

footing” with vehicles. Raised intersec-

tions are generally installed on residential or minor collector streets and avoided on higher volume

streets. The gentle ramps that lead to the heart of the intersection and the large raised area are

designed to avoid damage to large vehicles and emergency response vehicles.

HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK• Zebra or ladder striping

• Stamped painted asphalt or

brick treatment (may be used for

aesthetic or urban form reasons

but should be designed and

maintained to remain highly

visible)

CURB EXTENSIONSCurb extensions lengthen the curb line

into the street, narrowing the street

at intersections or mid-block and re-

allocating a portion of street space to

pedestrians or ancillary uses. They are

most often used in residential neigh-

borhoods and downtown commercial

areas. Also known as bulbouts, pop-

outs, or neckdowns, curb extensions

increase drivers’ awareness of pedestri-

ans, decrease crossing distance, reduce pedestrian exposure to traffi c, and reduce traffi c speeds.

Studies show that curb extensions, when combined with a marked crosswalk, increase the num-

ber of vehicles yielding to pedestrians waiting to cross the street. Curb extensions also may be

used to make the street more amenable by providing space for landscaping, art, lighting, signage

or street furniture. When used with on-street parking, they also provide protection for vehicles

parked behind the bulbout. Curb extensions may also provide an area for street trees, landscap-

ing, or vegetated areas for stormwater attenuation.

STOP BAR PLACEMENTStop lines are most often placed 4-6

feet back from marked crosswalks at

intersections. Lines placed up to 10

feet back from crosswalk markings

are an important option (when sight

distance permits) in order to reduce

encroachment into the cross walk by

vehicles. At midblock crosswalks, stop

bars (or advance yield lines) should be

placed 20-30 feet back from the cross-

walk on two-lane roadways and 30-50 feet back from the crosswalk on multilane roadways; the

further setback on multilane roadways is needed to accommodate vehicle sight distance of cross-

ing pedestrians and to prevent multiple threat crashes (where a vehicle in one lane stops but a

vehicle in an adjacent lane has their view of the crossing pedestrian blocked and does not stop).

MEDIAN NOSESMedian noses can be used to help pro-

vide a protective refuge for any pedes-

trians caught in the middle of the street

during a crossing and to help control

the speeds of left turning vehicles. Nos-

es can be deep (6-12 feet) shallow (2-4

feet), or set behind crosswalks when no

further extensions are possible. In rare

cases, crosswalks can be skewed a few

degrees in order to get median noses to

fi t, although more than a few degrees of skew can be problematic to the visually impaired. With

careful design, it is possible to include median noses on many intersections.

APPROPRIATE CORNER RADIILarge intersection and driveway corner radii

create longer crossing distances for pedes-

trians and encourage higher vehicle turning

speeds, which can put pedestrians in danger.

If a particular intersection has a low turning

volume of trucks and buses, smaller corner ra-

dii of 20-30 feet can be used.

Intersections are places of managed confl ict and are often very intimidating places for pe-destrians. Effi ciently designed intersections keep confi gurations compact, limit the num-ber and width of lanes, keep speeds low, and keep costs of roadway systems aff ordable.

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

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanBIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS

Due to insuffi cient space, this design forces pedestrians with disabilities against traffi c. Two

ramps on this corner would eliminate the problem (Photo: Dan Burden).

PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWNPedestrian countdown signals give

crossing pedestrians an indication of

how much time they have left to com-

plete their crossing and end much of the

confusion that standard signal heads

create (“I only had four seconds to cross

the street before the hand started to fl ash

at me”). They also give a clear idea of ac-

tual time left to complete the crossing.

Countdown signals should be used on all

new construction projects, and should

be used as a retrofi t replacement of older pedestrian signals particularly on multi-lane roadways.

BIKE DETECTOR MARKINGSShows bicyclist the proper positioning

at an intersection to trigger a green

light.

YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS BLANKOUT SIGNSThese signs increase awareness of crossing pedestrians at intersections. Signs typically read “Yield

to Peds” during the concurrent movement green signal phase; this message can be displayed

automatically during all signal cycles or only when the pedestrian phase has been actuated.

During confl icting movement phases, the sign can either be blank, or can read “No Turn on Red”

if it is desired to prohibit this movement for the benefi t of pedestrians legally crossing the path of

the right on red movement.

LEADING PEDESTRIAN INTERVAL LPIProvides the pedestrian a head start (typically 3-5 seconds) before motor vehicle traffi c is given a

green light, and thereby helps to reduce pedestrian confl ict with turning vehicles.

EXCLUSIVE PEDESTRIAN PHASEGives pedestrians a separate phase that

allows them to cross an intersection in

any direction (including diagonally) with-

out vehicle confl ict.

PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTONSPedestrian push buttons provide immediate feedback to us-

ers concerning a request made for a pedestrian phase, simi-

lar to elevator buttons that light up when pushed.

PP

e

l

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

General Design Guidance:• Keep corner radii to appropriate levels (i.e. never so wide as to induce speed).

• Maximize use of curb extensions to inset parking and allow for planter boxes and other furniture to help orient and

guide pedestrians.

• Curb extensions also protect the corner from illegal parking, reduce crossing distances and time, and provide aware-

ness of when a person enters and exits a street.

• Use color, texture, and tactile features to help orient and guide.

• Maximize entry and exit widths. Use minimum widths only when necessary because of other site constraints.

• Whenever possible, provide two ramps at street corners in order to facilitate safe movement of pedestrians. Dual

ramps are especially important for those in wheelchairs or who are visually impaired. As corner radii increase above

30 feet, ramp placement shifts away from the intersection, which takes pedestrians out of the sightlines of turning

motorists. As such, unless curb extensions are used, corner radii of 30 feet or more may call for only a single ramp in

order to allow crosswalks to be placed closer to the intersection.

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

BIKE / PEDESTRIAN TREATMENTS

 

 

 

 

 

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanHIKEBIKE TRAILS CONCEPT PLAN

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

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

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

• Connecting Six Points and Flour Bluff. The primary connections between the Six Points and Flour Bluff Nodes are via Ayers Street, Ocean Drive, and Ennis Joslin

Road. The various existing trail segments along the Ocean Drive corridor should be connected into one continuous pathway. However, on-road connectivity enhance-

ments are discussed on the Corridor Mobility Concepts: Ocean Drive sheet. An additional connection needs to be identified from the Ennis Joslin/SPID intersection to

either the existing trail along Paul Jones Avenue or to the proposed trail along the west side of the Cayo del Oso. Further, restoration of the Oso Railroad trestle located

on the Holly Road corridor to serve as a trail bridge should be prioritized.

• Connecting Saratoga/Weber and Flour Bluff. There are numerous connection opportunities between the Saratoga/Weber and Flour Bluff Nodes, including several

drainage ways and the Oso Creek Green Belt. Again, the best connection across Oso Creek or the Cayo del Oso would be the rehabilitation of the existing Oso Railroad

trestle bridge. Two of the most promising drainage ways alongside which a trail might be developed to connect these two nodes are highlighted on the map on the

reverse page.

• Two locations were identified for potential new off-road recreational opportunities:

◦ Behind the Corpus Christi Natatorium adjacent to Cabaniss Field: the City owns the land in this area, which may provide the opportunity for facilities such as a BMX bike park and an off -

road trail network, complete with a trailhead, interpretive signage, and other amenities. An aerial view of this area with potential locations for recommended facilities is shown on page 3.

The proposed Phase 1 trail generally follows the proposed alignment of the drainage canal trail connection between Saratoga Boulevard and Oso Creek. A footbridge would be needed to

cross to the west side of the canal to provide access to additional open land on which trails could be developed in a later phase.

◦ The old (closed) Holly Road roadbed in Flour Bluff : Recreational amenities and picnic facilities could be provided in Flour Bluff on the eastern shore of the Cayo del Oso, at the terminus of the

existing Oso railroad trestle. Key implementation steps may include re-grading the existing roadway, removing sections of deteriorating pavement, and installing interpretive signage and

amenities such as picnic tables and trash cans.

s

x d

BICYCLE LANESBicycle lanes are the por-

tion of a roadway which

has been designated by

striping, signing, and pave-

ment markings for the

preferential or exclusive use

of bicyclists. They are most

appropriate and most use-

ful on arterial and collector

streets but are generally

not appropriate or neces-

sary on local or neighborhood streets. The bike lane is located adjacent to

motor vehicle travel lanes and fl ows in the same direction as motor vehicle

traffi c. Bike lanes are typically on the right side of the street, between the adja-

cent travel lane and curb, road edge, or parking lane. Bicycle lanes should be

designed to the minimum standards contained in AASHTO’s Guide for the De-

velopment of Bicycle Facilities. The minimum width should be 5 feet with curb

and gutter (measured from face of curb) or 4 feet without curb and gutter.

COLORED BICYCLE LANESColored pavement within

a bicycle lane increases the

visibility of the facility, iden-

tifi es potential areas of con-

fl ict, and reinforces priority

to bicyclists in confl ict areas

and in areas with pressure

for illegal parking. Colored

pavement is commonly ap-

plied at intersections, drive-

ways, confl ict areas, and

along non-standard or enhanced facilities, such as cycle tracks. Motorists

are expected to yield right of way to bicyclists at these locations. Though

rarely done in North America, color can be applied along the entire length

of bicycle lanes to increase the overall visibility of the facility and visually

narrow the roadway for motorists.

SHARED LANE MARKINGS “SHARROWS”Shared Lane Markings,

also known as “Sharrows”,

are markings that are used

in lanes that are shared

by bicycles and motor ve-

hicles when a travel lane

is too narrow to provide

a standard-width bicycle

lane. The markings have

been incorporated into the

2009 version of the MUTCD. They let motorists know to expect bicyclists,

provide lateral positioning guidance to bicyclists, and reinforce good bicy-

cling behavior. Sharrows should be considered on roadways too narrow for

bicycles and motor vehicles to share side by side (typically less than 14-feet

wide); on roadways with on-street parking; where there are gaps in a bi-

cycle lane (such as before a bicycle lane begins or after a bicycle lane ends);

for designated bicycle routes; and on roadways with a hill where there is

only enough width to provide a bicycle lane in one direction (a bicycle lane

should be provide d in the uphill direction, and sharrows should be provided

in the downhill direction). Sharrows should only be implemented on road-

ways with posted speeds of 35 mph or less, and the MUTCD recommends

placement of the markings after intersections and not more than every 250

feet thereafter. The 250-foot spacing is preferred on roadways with on-street

parking, but greater spacing is acceptable for roadways without on-street

parking (up to 500 feet).

BUFFERED BICYCLE LANES Buff ered bike lanes are

conventional bicycle lanes

paired with a designated

buff er space separating

the bicycle lane from the

adjacent motor vehicle

travel lane and/or parking

lane. A buff ered bike lane

is allowed as per MUTCD

guidelines for buff ered pref-

erential lanes (section 3D-

01). The buff ered bike lane

provides additional space between the cyclist and either the motoring public

or the ‘door zone’ of parked vehicles. Buff ered lanes provide a greater space for

bicycling without making the bike lane appear so wide that it might be mis-

taken for a travel lane or a parking lane. Buff ering should be used adjacent

to parking lanes, or on roadways with high travel speeds, high travel volumes,

high amounts of truck traffi c or streets with extra lanes or wide lanes.

n

e

-

-

y

s

e

d

-

-

d

INTRODUCTION

HIKE/BIKE OPPORTUNITIES

ONSTREET BICYCLE CONNECTION OPTIONS

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanHIKEBIKE TRAILS CONCEPT PLAN

Flour BluffNode

Saratoga/WeberNode

!F

CorpusChristi

!F

SeeInset Map

NILE

DR

ACUSHNET DRAARO

N DR

CEDAR PASS RNOR

HGATE

DR

WOOLDRIDGERD

ST ANDREW

S DR

BRO

CKHA

MPT

ON

ST

THAM

ESDR

SEAN

DR

OSO PKWY

SLOUGH RD

WILLIAMS DR

KOST

ORYZ

RD

KENTNER STMCARDLE RD

DA ST

WAL

DRON

RD

WEB

ER

CARR

OLL

LN

ECKNER DR

MEGAL DR

AIR

LIN

E R

D

AYER

S ST

UTICA ST

ST

ENW

OO

QUET ZAL

ST

MCARDLE RD

JAM

AICA

DR

ST

SHOR

E D

R

BRID

GETT

DR

AIR

LIN

E R

D ORIOLE

ST

BISO

N DR

PADRE ISLAND DR

KASP

ER S

T

WHI

TAKE

R DR

MASTERSON DR

VIAL

OUX

DR

DELT

A DR

STAP

LES

ST

PADRE ISLAND DR

AVE D

SA

LVD

MODESTO ST

CLIN

E ST

DS RD

SALS

A DR

TIGER LN

FRED

S FO

LLY

DR

DALM

ATIO

N DR

CARIBBEAN DR

JESTER ST

NAVY DRMATLOCK ST

OCEAN DR

SARATOGA BLVD

AVE D

LIPES BLVD

RD H

LAMONT ST

ALAMEDA STTRIPOLI DR

WOOLDRIDGE RD

PERSIMMON ST

ROCK

CRE

ST D

R

LAMONT ST

ST MARIA DR

FM 2444

AVE E

DELPHINE ST

KING

TRL

ADKINS DR

FM 665

GRAHAM RD

DI MM

IT DR

PALO

MA

ST

DR

HILL

ST

O NEILL ST

SWEE

T BA

Y DR

OCEAN DR

RETT

A ST

IMPA

LA D

RMT

ZIO

N D

R

BROOKE RD

STAP

LES

ST

TIMBERGATE DR

YORKTOWN BLVD

MILO ST

F

SKIPPER LN

CIM

ARRO

N BL

VD

SARATOGA BLVD

RODD

FIE

LD R

D

LAGU

NA S

HORE

S DR

SALE

M D

R

HO

RAMFIELD RD

QUEENS CRT

HWY 358 FRWY

MARTHA DR

HAKE

COSN

E

FLYN

N PK

WY

HERR

ING

DR

O DAY PKWY

PANAMA DR

HOLL

AND

DR

CAIN DR

HOLLY RD

CIM

ARRO

N BL

VD

DOLP

HIN

PL

CR 22

WEBER RD

3RD

ST

1ST ST

OSO

PK

WY

HERMOSA DR

ROSC

HER

RD

OSO

PKW

Y AL

AZAN DR

BROC

K DRCR 26

4TH

ST

CR

47

FLOU

R BL

UFF

DR

BERL

ET L

N

HOLLY RD

DIG

GER

LN

HWY

286

DIG

GER

LN

FM 43

CR

41

RABBIT RUN DR

CR 20A

CR 3

7

CR

53

5

CR

43

CR

49

CR

47

CR

53

RODD

FIE

LD R

D

CR

49

FM 43

CR 26A

86

CR 18

CR 14

CR 22

CR 14

CR

53

CR

43

FM 2444

FM 7

63

CR 18

CR

47

6

CR

43

4

CR 18

CR 14A

CR 14CR 14 CR 14

CR

41A

SOUTH PRAIRIE RD

CR

49A

CR 26

PADR

STAPLES ST

WALL

ACE AV

E

LEXI

NGTO

N BL

VD

HUNT

DR

QUE

B

EC DR

LANS

DOWN

D R

B E LMEA

DE

DR

OSO

PKWY

LAGU

NA SH

ORE

S RD

CLAR

E DR

ENNIS JO

SLIN

RD

Six PointsNode

SeeMain Map

AYERS ST

KENTN

GOLLIHAR RD

KOST

ORYZ

RD

AVEST

HWY 358 FRWY

DODDRIDGE ST

FT WORTH

ST

LAREDO ST

POPE DR

KASP

ER S

T

SANTA FE ST

CENTER

DR

ST

M BLVD

LIPAN ST

15TH

ST

TIG

KAY ST

PURL PL

NAPL

ES ST

LAMONT ST

OHIO AVE

18TH ST

DELPHINE ST

ADKINS DR

FLOYD ST

3RD ST

H ELY ST

PALO

MA

ST

6TH

ST

ARA

ST

LEN

COTT

ST

OCK

DR

STIR

MAN ST

COSN

ER D

R

OLSEN DR

GAINES ST

FANNIN ST

AUSTIN ST

TOPEKA ST

ORMON

D DR

TANC

AH

UA

ST

STA

WAT

ER ST

11TH

ST

HAM

LIN

DR

REID DR

17TH

ST

CARMEL PKWY

OCEAN DR

RAY DR

DEVO

N DR

SHAR

ON D

R

YORK

AVE

Legend

Off-Road Recreational Opportunity!(

Existing Hike/Bike Trail

Potential On-Street Bicycle Connection(Bike Lanes or Bike Route)Potential Hike/Bike Trail Opportunity

Node Boundaries

Existing Bike Lanes

O0 0.7 1.4 2.1

Miles!F

Priority Hike/Bike Trail Opportunity

1

1

CC2

!!!!!!!!4

2

2222222222222

3

FFFFFFMMMMMMMM 2222222444444444444444444444444444444444444444

CCCCCCRR 118

CCCCRR

443333

4

43

HIKEBIKE OPPORTUNITIES MAP

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanHIKEBIKE TRAILS CONCEPT PLAN

!C

Corpus ChristiNatatorium

AYER

S ST

BRATTON RD

SARATOGA BLVD

WOW RD

SATURN RDAPOLLO RD

WOW RD

RANG

ER A

VE

CABANISS

PKW

Y

WEBER RD

BREZ

INA

RD

Legend

Phase 1

Phase 2

Trailhead / Signage

O0 500 1,000 1,500

Feet

!C

PotentialLocation 1

of BMX Park

PotentialLocation 2

of BMX Park

CABA

NISS

PKW

Y

!C

Potential Location of BMX Park

Potential Bridge

1

2

3

2

3

1

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

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

Citywide Trails Master Plan, which would include: identifying

potential trail corridors, assessing the feasibility of trail con-

struction, and identifying issues, costs, priorities, and potential

funding sources.

• Implement previously identified high priority action items from

the Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Master Plan including:

◦ Development of additional Bay Trail segments to connect Oso

Creek and Bill Witt Parks to the Bay Trail Phase III

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

and fi shing, with connections in the Southside and Flour Bluff .

• Partner with other agencies and organizations to identify fund-

ing opportunities and expand the trails network and identifying

funding opportunities. Potential partners include: the MPO;

Community Redevelopment Areas/Agencies (CRA’s); School

Board; Department of Education; Colleges and Universities;

Community Traffic Safety Team (CTST); Bicycle and Walking Ad-

vocacy Organizations; Trails Organizations; Parks, Recreation,

and Waterfront Organizations; Public Health Departments, Or-

ganizations, and Task Forces; Chambers of Commerce; Transit

Agencies; Utilities Companies and Systems; Railroads; Port Au-

thority; Department of Environmental Protection; and Branches

of the U.S. Military.

• Aggressively pursue funding opportunities which may include

Transportation Enhancement funds; Recreational Trails Program

funds; Transportation, Community, and System Preservation

Program (TCSP); Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ);

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) Grants; Bonds; Ac-

tive Living/Transportation grants; private donations or sponsor-

ships; and City general funds.

CABANISS FIELD RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES MAP IMPLEMENTATION

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

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

Features of a modern roundabout.

WHAT IS A MODERN ROUNDABOUT?

ROUNDABOUT BENEFITSLives saved

• Up to a 90% reduction in fatalities

• 76% reduction in injury crashes

• 30-40% reduction in pedestrian crashes

• 75% fewer conflict points than four-way intersectionsSlower vehicle speeds (under 30 mph)

• Allows drivers more time to judge and react to other cars or pedestrians

• Accommodates older and novice drivers

• Reduces the severity of crashes

• Creates safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists Effi cient traffi c fl ow

• 30-50% increase in traffic capacity

• Improved traffic flow for intersections that handle a high number of left turns

• Reduced need for storage lanes

ROUNDABOUT ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGESADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

NONMOTORIZED USERS

• Pedestrians must consider only one direction of conflicting traffic at a time.

• Bicyclists have options for negotiating roundabouts, depending on their skill and

comfor t level.

• Pedestrians with vision impairments may have trouble finding crosswalks and de-

termining when/if vehicles have yielded at crosswalks.

• Bicycle ramps at roundabouts have the potential to be confused with pedestrian

ramps.

SAFET Y

• Reduce crash severity for all users, allow safer merges into circulating traffic, and

provide more time for all users to detect and correct for their mistakes or the mis-

takes of others due to lower vehicle speeds.

• Fewer overall conflict points and no left-turn conflicts.

• Increase in single-vehicle and fixed-object crashes compared to other intersection

treatments.

• Multilane roundabouts present more difficulties for individuals with blindness or

low vision due to challenges in detecting gaps and determining that vehicles have

yielded at crosswalks.

OPER ATIONS

• May have lower delays and queues than other forms of intersection control.

• Can reduce lane requirements between intersections, including bridges between

ramp terminals.

• Creates possibility for adjacent signals to operate with more efficient cycle lengths

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

• Equal priority for all approaches can reduce the progression for high volume ap-

proaches.

• Cannot provide explicit priority to specific users (e.g. trains, emergency vehicles,

transit, pedestrians) unless supplemental traffic control devices are provided.

ACCESS MANAGEMENT

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

and driveways.

ENVIRONMENTAL FAC TORS

• Noise, air quality impacts, and fuel consumption may be reduced.

• Little stopping during off-peak periods.

• Possible impacts to natural and cultural resources due to greater spatial require-

ments at intersections.

TR AFFIC C ALMING

• Reduced vehicular speeds.

• Beneficial in transition areas by reinforcing the notion of a significant change in the

driving environment.

• More expensive than other traffic calming treatments.

SPACE

• Often requires less queue storage space on intersection approaches and thus can

allow for closer intersection and access spacing.

• Reduces the need for additional right-of-way between links of intersection.

• More feasibility to accommodate parking, wider sidewalks, planter strips, wider out-

side lanes, and/or bicycle lanes on the approaches.

• Often requires more space at the intersection itself than other intersection treat-

ments.

OPER ATION & MAINTENANCE

• No signal hardware or equipment maintenance. • May require landscape maintenance.

AESTHETIC S

• Provide attractive entries, centerpieces, or landmarks in communities.

• Used in tourist or shopping areas to separate commercial uses from residential areas.

• Provide oppor tunity for landscaping and/or gateway feature to enhance the com-

munity.

• May create a safety hazard if hard objects are placed in the central island directly

facing the entries.

A roundabout can safely accommodate bicyclists (left), buses (center), and have only 8 vehicle confl ict points compared to conventional intersec-

tions, which have 32 (right), many of which are at high speeds and high impact angles.

Money saved• No signal equipment to install and repair equates to an estimated average sav-

ings of $5,000 per year in electricity and maintenance costs

• Service life of a roundabout is 25 years (vs. the 10-year service life of signal

equipment)Community benefi ts

• Calms traffic

• Safer pedestrian environment

• Reduces fuel consumption as well as air and noise pollution

• Creates a safer pedestrian environment

• Establishes a landmark identity and enhances sense of place

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

ROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

ROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

In a project similar to that proposed for the Morgan-Baldwin intersection, the intersection of College

Street and Oak Street in Asheville, NC was converted from a signalized intersection (top left) to a

single lane roundabout (top right). (Bottom) View of the College Street roundabout in Asheville, NC

from the other direction.

Concept for a single lane roundabout at the intersection of Morgan Avenue and Baldwin Boulevard.

• Provide slow entry speeds and consistent speeds through the roundabout by using deflection.

• Provide the appropriate number of lanes and lane assignment to achieve adequate capacity, lane volume

balance, and lane continuity.

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

tended lanes.

• Provide adequate accommodation for the design vehicles. Truck aprons are often used to accommodate

the turning needs of larger vehicles while maintaining a narrower circulating roadway and providing

adequate deflection for passenger vehicles.

• Design to meet the needs of pedestrians and cyclists.

• Provide appropriate sight distance and visibility for driver recognition of the intersection and conflicting

users.

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

PRIMARY DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATION OF A ROUNDABOUTRoundabout should be considered under a wide range of conditions but may be particularly advantageous for:

• Intersections with a high crash rate or a higher severity of crashes

• Replacement of all-way stops

• Replacement of signalized intersections, especially where unbalanced movements cause inefficiency

• Replacement of two-way stops when side street delay becomes excessive

• Intersections with complex geometry, skew angles, or more than four approaches

• Rural intersections with high-speed approaches

• Freeway interchange ramp terminals

• Intersections with high volume of U-turn movements

• Closely spaced intersections with widening constraints

• Transitions or “gateways” from high speed to lower speed areas

• Locations where aesthetics are important

BALDWIN BLVD

MOR

GAN

AVEN

UE

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

1. Complete a roundabout feasibility study (see list of potential elements on next page).

2. Look for opportunities to piggyback onto other projects, such as resurfacing of the corridors. Resurfacing

projects present an ideal time to restripe to implement a road diet along the corridor, which is recommended

for both the Morgan Avenue and Baldwin Boulevard corridors to facilitate the use of a single lane

roundabout.

3. Identify potential funding sources, which could include Transportation Enhancement funds, safety funds

such as Hazard Elimination Program (HEP), and Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ) funds.

4. Implement a policy to evaluate roundabouts at intersections for all new construction, reconstruction,

or when capacity improvements are being considered. For example, the New York State Department of

Transportation has a policy that roundabouts must be considered in such situations, and if feasible, should

be the Department’s preferred alternative due to the proven substantial safety and operational benefi ts.

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanROUNDABOUT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

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

1

5 6

2

3 4

ROUNDABOUT FEASIBILITY EXAMPLE PHOTOSA detailed roundabout feasibility study may include the following elements:

• Identify reasons for considering a roundabout as an improvement alternative at this intersection.

• Identify the existing traffic operations and safety conditions at the intersection for comparison with expected roundabout

performance. Give detailed performance comparisons (including delay, capacity, emissions, and/or interaction effects

with nearby intersections) of the roundabout with alternative control modes for existing and future conditions.

• Identify a conceptual roundabout configuration, which includes the number of lanes on each approach and the designa-

tion of those lanes.

• Demonstrate whether an appropriately sized and configured roundabout can be implemented. Observations may include:

◦ Physical and right-of-way features

◦ Current and planned site development features such as adjoining businesses, driveways, etc.

◦ Community considerations such as a need for parking, landscaping character, etc.

◦ Traffi c management strategies that are being (or will be used) in the area.

◦ Existing and projected public transit usage (routes, stops, etc.).

◦ Intersection treatments at adjacent intersections.

◦ History of public complaints that suggest a need for traffi c calming.

◦ Number of other roundabouts in the jurisdiction that would make drivers more familiar with this type of control.

Identify all potential complicating factors, assess their relevance to the location, and identify any mitigation eff orts that might be required. Potential complicating factors may include:

◦ Physical or geometric features that could make the construction or operation of a roundabout more diffi cult.

◦ Land use or traffi c generators that could interfere with construction or cause operational problems.

◦ Other traffi c control devices along any intersecting roadway which would require preemption.

◦ Bottlenecks on any of the intersecting roadways that could back up traffi c into the roundabout.

◦ Sight distance obstructions.

◦ Platooned arterial traffi c fl ow on one or more approaches.

◦ Heavy use by persons with special needs that could suggest a requirement for more positive control.

◦ Recent safety projects in the area to benefi t older drivers.

◦ Emergency vehicle operations coordination requirements.

◦ Emergency evacuation route coordination requirements.

◦ Other problems that have been identifi ed.

• Demonstrate institutional and community support, indicating that key institutions (e.g., police, fire department, and

schools) and key community leaders have been consulted.

• Include an economic analysis indicating that a roundabout compares favorably with alternative control modes from a

benefit-cost perspective.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

INTRODUCTION

ROAD DIET BENEFITS

CRITERIA FOR ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION

CANDIDATE ROAD DIET PROJECTS IN CORPUS CHRISTI

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

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

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

• Improved mobility and access, particularly for non-motorized modes:

◦ A three-lane cross section produces fewer conflict points between vehicles and crossing pedestrians.

◦ Pedestrians cross one direction and one lane of traffic at a time using median refuge islands, which can be provided in many places.

◦ A conversion from four to three lanes may allow the creation of designated bike lanes.

• Reduced number of collisions and injuries, which generally results from:

◦ A reduction in speed variability along the corridor.

◦ A decrease in the number of conflict points between vehicles.

◦ Improved sight distance for the major street left turn vehicles.

• Improved livability and quality of l ife.

• The cost of a road diet project can be minimized by simply re-striping a roadway during its normal maintenance cycle.

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

• There are generally no significant changes to traffic volumes on the road dieted streets, which means that they do not

result in a significant amount of diversion to other streets.

• Road dieted streets generally continue to operate adequately without significant queuing and operational impacts.

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

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

lane and the inside lane is used primarily for left turning traffic).

• High crash rates or high numbers of rear-end, sideswipe, and/or angle crashes related to left turn and crossing vehicles.

• Transit corridors.

• Popular or essential bicycle routes/links.

• General interest in balancing the needs of the transportation system with the interests of the surrounding community and the environment.

• General interest in creating a transportation facility that is an asset to the community.

• Commercial reinvestment areas or economic enterprise zones.

• Historic streets or scenic roads.

• Entertainment districts or main streets.

μ

1 - Leopard St (N Port Ave - N Upper Broadway)

2 - Brownlee Blvd (Laredo St to Staples St)

3 - Baldwin Blvd (Airport Rd to S Port Ave)

4 - Morgan Ave (Airport Rd to S Port Ave)

5 - Ayers St (Ocean Dr to S Port Ave)

6 - Santa Fe St (Ayers St to Robert Dr)

7 - Gollihar Rd (Greenwood Dr to S Staples St)

8 - McArdle Rd (Ayers St to Ennis Joslin Rd)

9 - Violet Rd (I-37 to South of Starlite Ln)

10- McKinzie Rd (I-37 to South of Haven Dr)

1

23 4

56

7

8

910

A road diet was completed on Edge-

water Drive in Orlando, FL to convert

it from four lanes (left photo) to three

lanes with bike lanes (right photo). The

project helped spawn a new mixed-use

project (multistory building shown in

right photo), and has resulted in docu-

mented increases in pedestrian and

bicycle use (23 and 30 percent, respec-

tively). Crash and injury rates along the

corridor decreased by 34 and 68 per-

cent, respectively, even though traffi c

volumes only declined slightly from their pre-project level of aproximately 20,000 vehicles per day. Travel times on the corridor were only minimally

aff ected, with an increase of 50 seconds in the AM peak hour over 1.5 miles, and only 10 seconds in the PM peak hour. The project was viewed as a suc-

cess by both area residents and business owners, who, when surveyed following its completion, gave positive feedback for 8 of 9 identifi ed measures

of eff ectiveness as to whether the project achieved its objectives.

Rozzelles Ferry Rd in Charlotte, NC

following a Road diet

Application of the road diet criteria to roadways in the City of Corpus Christi yielded 10 preliminary candidates for road diet implementa-

tion projects, as shown in the above graphic.

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

The Ayers Street corridor between Ocean Drive and Port Avenue is a strong candidate roadway for a road diet project. This following highlights the characteristics of two diff er-ent sections and illustrates the opportunities available.

North Section (Ocean Drive to Baldwin Boulevard):• Existing roadway section is a four-lane undivided roadway, 40 feet from curb to curb.

• 2010 ADT < 10,000 (strong road diet candidate).

• Provides a direct connection to the “Six Points” area and its existing RTA Six Points Station, as well as the

Christus Spohn Hospital – Shoreline.

• Potential roadway section is three lanes (one travel lane in each direction plus two-way center left turn

lane) and bike lanes, 40 feet from curb to curb.

South Section (Baldwin Boulevard to Port Avenue):• Existing roadway section is a five-lane section, including a two-way center left turn lane and a 60-foot

curb to curb width.

• 2010 ADT = 16,500 (well within the traffic l imits of a road diet, which is typically < 20,000).

• Provides connections to Del Mar College East Campus, Heb Park, Broadmoor Park, and the RTA Port-Ayers

Station.

• Potential roadway sections:

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

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

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

IMPLEMENTATION STEPSAYERS ST S. OF BALDWIN BLVD EXISTINGAYERS ST N. OF BALDWIN BLVD EXISTING

AYERS ST S. OF BALDWIN BLVD PROPOSED ALT. 2AYERS ST N. OF BALDWIN BLVD PROPOSED AYERS ST S. OF BALDWIN BLVD PROPOSED ALT. 1

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

ROAD DIET IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

ROAD DIET FEASIBILITY STUDYA detailed road diet feasibility study may include the following elements:

• Roadway Characteristics and Context

◦ Existing lane configuration and intersection geometry

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

◦ Primary adjacent land uses and destinations

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

◦ Crash types and patterns (typically, a five-year crash history is desirable)

◦ Existing pedestrian and bicycle volumes

◦ Presence of parallel routes

◦ Existing property values along study corridor

◦ Resident/business “before” survey

◦ Other contextual considerations

• Corridor Concepts/Typical Section Alternatives• Traffi c Operations

◦ Peak hour intersection turning volumes and patterns

◦ Traffic volumes along study corridor and parallel streets

◦ Existing corridor speeds (average, 85th percentile)

◦ Existing corridor travel times

◦ Existing on-street parking utilization (if applicable)

◦ Analysis of existing and future traffic volumes conditions

◦ Intersection level of service (LOS), delay, and queues

◦ Arterial travel time, average speed, and LOS

◦ Future conditions should typically be evaluated based on projected traffic volumes for a 20-year horizon

◦ In some cases, a traffic simulation of the corridor may be necessary

• Implementation Steps

◦ Recommended typical section concept

◦ Traffic control and access management changes needed to support proposed project

◦ Right-of-way availability, costs, and acquisition impacts

◦ Construction cost estimate

◦ Coordination opportunities, such as pavement reconstruction or overlay project, or jurisdictional roadway transfer

◦ Funding opportunities and/or strategies

Baxter Street in Athens, GA was converted from a four-lane undivided roadway (top) to a three-

lane roadway with shared bicycle areas (bottom). Traffi c volumes along the corridor were

largely unchanged (a decrease from approximately 19,000 ADT of only 3.7 percent), but crash

frequency decreased by over 53 percent compared to the before condition.

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION STEPS, CONT.To implement a road diet, the following steps should be followed:

1. Complete a road diet feasibility study (see list of potential elements). Feasibility studies should be completed for any

proposed road diet; facilities with existing traffi c volumes greater than 15,000 vehicles per day require more detailed study.

2. Look for opportunities to piggyback on other projects. Road diets are most eff ectively implemented when a roadway is being

resurfaced or reconstructed.

3. Identify potential funding sources, which could include Transportation Enhancement funds, safety funds such as Hazard

Elimination Program (HEP), and Congestion Mitigation for Air Quality (CMAQ) funds.

4. Following completion of a road diet project, it is important to document the results of the project by completing a follow-

up study to document actual traffi c volumes, travel times, speeds, pedestrian and bicycle activity, crashes, and public

satisfaction. An “after” study may help to provide justifi cation for future road diet projects.

East Blvd in Charlotte, NC following a Road diet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanCORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Leopard Street / Annaville

STARLITE LN

STARLITE LN

VIOLET RD

VIOLET RD

LEOPARD ST

LEOPARD STMC KINZIE RD

AERIAL

1. Incorporate the vision for the Leopard Street corridor in planning for the Annaville

Destination Node, including the creation of any land use or zoning overlays

associated with this destination node. Consider the following design elements:

a. Assessing the need for on-street parking

b. Limiting or eliminating driveway access to the street

c. Implementing landscaping and intersection treatment design guidelines

d. Establishing driveway design guidelines

e. Making provisions for future transit development

f. Requiring bicycle parking and providing associated design guidelines

2. Conduct a project development/feasibility study for Leopard Street that

incorporates the desired roadway type(s) and includes the following scope

elements:

a. Identification of preferred alternative

b. Coordination with the MPO and area stakeholders

c. Creation of design guidelines for landscaping, signage and roadway markings

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

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

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

• Four 12’ travel lanes with a 30’ landscaped median, with median breaks and turn lanes

• Variable shoulder width (up to 11’)

• Approximately 100’ of roadway, curb to curb

• Intermittent but few sidewalks along south side of roadway

• 14,000 average trips per day (2009)

• 45 MPH posted speed limit

• Numerous commercial/business driveways on both sides of the corridor

• Signalized intersections at major cross streets

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

EXISTING CONDITIONS ISSUES

Leopard Street is entirely automobile-oriented within the Annaville Destination Node. The realignment of this section of the corridor to include on-street parking and bicycle and pedestrian features would foster pedestrian-oriented development within this Node. Two alternatives are presented below; implementation decisions should be based on the adjacent land uses and available right of way.

• Alternative 1 involves re-visioning this corridor with a more coherent urban form and a more defined urban edge created by locating buildings closer to the street. The recom-

mended roadway section would be two, 11-foot travel lanes in each direction, and a 22-foot median with controlled directional, or full, openings at appropriate locations. The

roadway would also have a 5-foot bicycle lane, with a 3-foot striped buffer between the bicycle lane and an 8-foot, on-street, parallel parking area. Sidewalks with tree wells for

landscaping and street furniture would extend from the parking to the building frontage. Sidewalks in this area would be a minimum of 6 feet, but would ideally be 8 to 15 feet wide.

The curb to curb distance for this alternative is 98 feet, excluding sidewalks. This alternative should generally be accommodated in the existing 100 feet from edge of pavement to

edge of pavement. This alternative does include inside and outside curbs, and would require a closed drainage system (curb and gutter).

• Alternative 2 was developed to accommodate areas where less right-of-way is available and the curb to curb width of the roadway needs to be reduced. This alternative also

includes four 11-foot travel lanes and the 5-foot bicycle lane, but reduces the median width to 8 feet and eliminates the buffer and the on street parallel parking reducing the

curb to curb width to 62 feet. As in Alternative 1, this alternative would require curb and gutter. Sidewalks with tree planters would extend from the curb to the building frontage.

• Consideration and incorporation of mid-block crossings to provide safer pedestrian access across Leopard Street should also be included under both alternatives.

RECOMMENDATIONS

e. Identif ication of crosswalk locations and types

f. Identif ication of median openings and types

3. Coordinate with MPO and TxDOT as appropriate to begin programming for

recommended modifications through various potential funding programs,

including: safety funds, enhancement funds, general roadway funds, and local

funds.

4. Prioritize the recommended reconfiguration of the Leopard Street corridor in

the Annaville Destination Node through the MPO process for federal funding

eligibility, if applicable.

5. Design and construct improvements opportunistically as funding becomes

available, or in coordination with standard resurfacing projects.

6. In the interim, for additional development or redevelopment in this project area,

consider limiting driveway access and driveway widths, requiring cross-access

easements, and eliminating or retrofit ting existing driveways to enhance safety

for all users. Incorporation or completion of the currently intermit tent sidewalk

should be prioritized as funding becomes available or as a required part of future

development projects along the corridor.

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

LEOPARD STREET / ANNAVILLE

CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Leopard Street / Annaville

EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION ALTERNATIVE 1

EXISTING PHOTO EXAMPLE PHOTOS

ALTERNATIVE 2

The existing Leopard Street corridor in the Annaville area has a suburban typical section with four

12-foot travel lanes, variable width paved shoulders (up to 11 feet) and a 30-foot wide landscaped

median with median breaks and turn lanes.

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

Alternative 1 would reconfi gure Leopard Street using an urban typical section with narrower 11-foot

travel lanes, a narrower 22-foot raised and landscaped median, on-street parking, and buff ered

bicycle lanes.

Alternative 2 is a variation of the urban typical section presented in Alternative 1, but would apply in

locations with constrained right-of-way where a narrower curb-to-curb width is needed. This sec-

tion narrows the median to 8 feet (between intersections) and eliminates the on-street parking and

bicycle lane buff ering.

(1) Four-lane divided roadway with on-street parking in Boulder, CO. (2) Four-lane divided roadway with narrow median and bike lanes in

University Place, WA. (3) Four-lane divided roadway with bike lanes and signalized midblock pedestrian crosswalk in Lake Worth, FL. (4) Sidewalk

along four-lane divided roadway with on-street parking in Del Mar, CA. (5) Example graphic showing bicycle lane with buff ered area to adjacent

on-street parking.

1 2

5

3 4

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanCORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Lipes Boulevard

RODD FLE

UD RD

RODD FLE

UD RD

AIRL

INE

RDAI

RLIN

E RD

C IM

ARRON BLV

D

CIM

ARRON BLV

D

STAPLE

S ST

STAPLE

S ST

YORKTOWN BLVD

YORKTOWN BLVD

LIPES BLVD

LIPES BLVD

SUNWOOD DRSUNWOOD DRCEDAR PASS DR

CEDAR PASS DR

PLANNED LIPES BLVD EXTENSION

PLANNED LIPES BLVD EXTENSION

KAFFIE MIDDLE

KAFFIE MIDDLE

SCHOOL

SCHOOL

JONES JONES

ELEMENTARY ELEMENTARY SCHOOLSCHOOL

BROCKHAMPTON BROCKHAMPTON

PARKPARK

CROSSGATE PARKCROSSGATE PARK

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

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

There are several options for addressing this bicycle/parking confl ict, including:

• Modif ying the on-street parking

• Removing the parking on one or both sides

• Time-restricted parking

• Restriping to provide both parking and bicycle lanes

• Removal of bicycle lanes in the section where on-street parking is necessary

(sharrow markings could be used in these areas).

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

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

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

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

◦ Recommended Alternative #2 includes retaining the on street parking on one side, which may be appropriate near areas such as Kaffie Middle

School and Jones Elementary School. Bicycle lanes are provided, with the bicycle lane buffered on the side providing on-street parking. Curb

bulbouts into the parking lane are recommended at street corners to narrow the cross section of the street.

• Designating addition of bicycle lanes or shared lane markings (“sharrows”) on connecting corridors to provide bicycle access via neighborhood collec-

tors to various destinations.

• Incorporating bicycle facilities into the planned Lipes Boulevard Extension, as well as into any potential future development along this corridor or

within the Airline Road, Rodd Field Road, or Yorktown Boulevard corridors.

• Two travel lanes with on-street parking (unmarked) allowed along both sides

of the road

• Approximately 46’ of pavement, curb to curb

• 5’ sidewalks along both sides of roadway

• Approximately 68’ feet from back of sidewalk to the back of sidewalk

• No bicycle lanes/trails

• 30 MPH posted speed limit

• Direct access to Kaf fie Middle School and Jones Elementary School

• Access to Crossgate Park and Brockhampton Park

• Few driveways along Lipes Boulevard

• Signalized intersections with major arterial and collectors

• Planned extension of Lipes Boulevard from Cimarron Boulevard to Airline Road

1. Conduct a project development/feasibility study for a pilot bicycle route project along the Lipes Boulevard corridor that includes:

a. Developing guidelines and procedures for establishing criteria for on-street parking modifications related to new/existing bicycle lanes. The guidelines should also

outline procedures in the selection of streets for new bicycle lanes. Implement the guidelines along corridors with bicycle lane/on-street parking conf licts on a case-

by-case basis

b. Coordinating with area stakeholders and bicyclists

c. Coordinating with the MPO and any relevant bicycle/pedestrian committees

d. Designing guidelines for landscaping and driveway placement

e. Identif ying other future routes and connections to area destinations, parks, and transit stops

2. Coordinate with MPO to begin programming for needed, identif ied modifications through various potential funding programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds,

general roadway funds, and local funds.

3. Prioritize implementation of the proposed steps through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility, if applicable.

4. Design and construct improvements as funding becomes available or in coordination with standard resurfacing projects

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

EXISTING CONDITIONS ISSUES

RECOMMENDATIONS

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

LIPES BOULEVARD

CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Lipes Boulevard

Lipes Boulevard, shown here to the east of Staples Street, features wide lanes that allow for on-street

parking on both sides of the street. This parking is seldom used except for the areas immediately

adjacent to Kaffi e Middle School and Jones Elementary School.

The existing Lipes Boulevard corridor has an urban typical section with two travel lanes and

unmarked parallel parking along both sides of the road. A total of 46 feet of pavement is provided

between the curbs.

Alternative 2 would eliminate on-street parking on one side of the street, and include bicycle lanes.

The bicycle lane adjacent to on-street parking would include a striped buff er.

Alternative 1 would eliminate on-street parking and reconfi gure the space with buff ered bicycle

lanes.

(1) Example two-lane residential collector street with bike lanes and on-street parking on one

side adjacent to a school, Cornelius, NC. (2) Example two-lane residential collector street with

bike lanes and on-street parking on one side, Port Townsend, WA. (3) Two-lane roadway with

buff ered bike lanes and on-street parking on one side, Seattle, WA. (4) Buff ered bike lane in

Gainesville, FL. (5) Example graphic showing bicycle lane with buff ered area to adjacent on-

street parking. (6) Shared lane marking (“sharrow”) adjacent to on-street parking, Tallahassee,

FL.

1

5

2

6

3 4

EXISTING TYPICAL SECTION ALTERNATIVE 1

EXAMPLE PHOTOSEXISTING SECTION PHOTO

ALTERNATIVE 2

Li B l d h h h f S l S f id l h ll f

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanCORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Ocean Drive

COLE PARKCOLE PARK

LOUISIANA PKWYLOUISIANA PKWY

ENNIS JOSLIN RD

ENNIS JOSLIN RD

OCEAN DR

OCEAN DR

AIRL

INE

RDAI

RLIN

E RD

EVERHART RD

EVERHART RD

ROBERT DR

ROBERT DR

DODDRIDGE RDDODDRIDGE RD

ALTA PLA Z A STALTA PLA Z A ST

OCEAN DR

OCEAN DR

ROPES PARKROPES PARK

Corpus Christi Bay

DODDRIDGE PARKDODDRIDGE PARK

SWATNER PARKSWATNER PARK

PALMETTO PARKPALMETTO PARK

TEXAS A&MTEXAS A&M

UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY

CORPUS CHRISTICORPUS CHRISTI

AERIAL

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

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

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

• Alternative 1: Restripe the existing corridor to include the addition of buf fered bicycle lanes. This alternative generally only involves

restriping the existing pavement. By narrowing the existing lanes to 11 feet, a 3-foot buf fer of diagonal striping can be added on both

sides of the roadway, leaving a 6-foot bicycle lane. This striped barrier will provide more distance between cyclists and motorists,

and will also potentially calm traf f ic by visually narrowing the road. The striped buf fer will also help to discourage those that may

perceive the bicycle lane as a parking area. There are also several intersections at which the southbound bicycle lane is not continuous

through the intersection, including Alta Plaza Street, Doddridge Street, Robert Drive, Airline Drive, and Ennis Joslin Road. Each of

these intersections should be reconfigured to provide a continuous bicycle lane for southbound bicycle traf f ic through the intersections.

Alternative 1 represents a lower cost solution that might be implemented in the immediate near term, or alternatively at the time of

the next pavement overlay project on Ocean Drive.

• Alternative 2: Reconstruct the roadway to add a two-way cycle track on the north side. A cycle track is an exclusive bike facility

that has elements of a separated path and on-road bike lane. A cycle track, while stil l within the roadway, is physically separated from

motor traf f ic and is distinct from the sidewalk. This alternative will require relocation of the existing median. One 12-foot and one 11-

foot travel lane would be constructed on the south side of the alignment for eastbound traf f ic. On the other side of a 10-foot median,

an 11-foot inside and 12-foot outside lane would accommodate westbound traf f ic. A new 6-foot median would then be constructed to

separate the cycle track from the arterial. The cycle track would be 10 feet wide and would be striped and signed as a bi-directional

path. The number of existing driveways on the north side of the road may make this alternative more challenging, as access to the

properties would stil l need to be provided. Furthermore, treatments would be necessary at both ends of the two-way cycle track to

ensure bicyclists would not ride on the wrong side of the roadway beyond the termini of the cycle track, as well as at signalized inter-

sections to alleviate potential bicycle-vehicle conf lict points.

• The addition/completion of a 6-foot sidewalk on the north side is also recommended. Existing development and right-of-way limi-

tations may present challenges, but completion of the sidewalk can be incorporated into other projects or funded as a stand alone

project.

• Incorporate mid-block crossings (see Bike/Pedestrian Treatment sheet included in another section of this Integrated Community Sus-

tainability Plan) to provide safer pedestrian access from residential areas on the south to the parks along Corpus Christi Bay.

ISSUES

IMPLEMENTATION STEPS

EXISTING CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Conduct a project development/feasibility study for the Ocean Drive bicycle facilities that includes:

a. Feasibility and cost/benefit analysis of potential cycle track (alternative #2)

b. Identif ication of preferred alternative

c. Coordination with the MPO, area stakeholders, and any relevant bicycle/pedestrian committees

d. Creation of design guidelines for landscaping, signage and roadway markings

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

2. Identif y and design crossing improvements from sidewalks along the south side to the park destinations on the north side, including

potential options such as median refuges and staggered crossings as discussed on the Bike/Pedestrian Treatment sheet.

3. Coordinate with MPO and TxDOT as appropriate to begin programming for needed modifications through various potential funding

programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds, general roadway funds, and local funds.

4. Prioritize implementation of the proposed steps through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility, if applicable.

5. Design and construct improvements as funding becomes available, or in coordination with standard resurfacing projects.

• Four 12’ travel lanes with a 10’ landscaped median and 7’ bike lanes along both sides

• Approximately 67’ of roadway, curb to curb

• 5’ sidewalk along south side of roadway

• 12,200 to 18,400 average trips per day (2010)

• 45 MPH posted speed limit, Ennis Joslin Road to Robert Drive

• 40 MPH posted speed Robert Drive to Louisiana Parkway

• Provides direct access to 5 parks along Corpus Christi Bay

• Many residential driveways on both the north and south sides of the corridor

• Intersections with major arterials and collectors are signalized

• Connection from Texas A&M University Corpus Christi to Downtown via Shoreline Drive

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability Plan

OCEAN DRIVE

CORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Ocean Drive

The existing Ocean Boulevard corridor has an urban typical section with two 12-foot travel lanes

in each direction, 7-foot bicycle lanes, and a 10-foot raised, landscaped median. There is a 5-foot

sidewalk at the back of curb on the south side of the road.

(Left) The existing Ocean Drive typical section has two travel lanes in each direction, a narrow

median, and bicycle lanes. (Right) There are several locations where the southbound bicycle

lane is not continuous through an intersection, including this location at the Ennis Joslin Road

intersection.

Alternative 1 would involve a simple restriping of the existing pavement to narrow the travel lanes

to 11 feet, and provide a 3-foot striped buff er between the bicycle lane (narrowed slightly to 6 feet)

and the travel lanes. In addition, a 6-foot sidewalk is proposed to be added to the north side of the

road.

Alternative 2 involves the reconstruction of the corridor to provide a median separated two-way

cycle track on the north side of the road, which would necessitate the existing travel lanes and

median being shifted to the south. Like Alternative 1, this alternative also includes construction of

a new 6-foot sidewalk on the north side of the road.

EXISTING SECTION

EXISTING SECTION PHOTOS EXAMPLE PHOTOS

ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2

1

5

2 3 4

(1) Example of a buff ered bicycle lane in Corpus Christi on Commodores Drive. (2) Example of a buff ered bicycle lane, Austin, TX. (3) Use of a green

bicycle lane to highlight a confl ict point between through bicycle traffi c and motor vehicle traffi c turning right from a side street, Austin, TX. This

treatment could be used at locations along Ocean Drive such as Ennis Joslin Road and Airline Drive. (4) Example of a median separated two-way

cycle track, St. Petersburg, FL. (5) Graphic showing a median separated two-way cycle track and the potential use of green pavement where driveway

traffi c would be required to cross the cycle track.

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanCORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Old Brownsville Road

AIRP

ORT

RDAI

RPOR

T RD

HORNE RDHORNE RD

BEAR LNBEAR LN

OLD BROWNSVILLE RD

OLD BROWNSVILLE RD

NAVI

GATI

ON B

LVD

NAVI

GATI

ON B

LVD

CLIF

MAU

S DR

CLIF

MAU

S DR

SOUTH PADRE ISLAND DR.

SOUTH PADRE ISLAND DR.

GABE LOZANO SR. GABE LOZANO SR.

GOLF COURSEGOLF COURSE

DEL MAR COLLEGEDEL MAR COLLEGE

WEST CAMPUSWEST CAMPUS

AERIAL

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

• Expanding multi-modal opportunities

• Controlling access and maintain roadway function

• Creating safe crossing points for pedestrians/cyclists

• Enhancing landscaping and livability features

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

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

• Four 12’-15’ travel lanes with a 14’ center turn lane

• Approximately 68’ of pavement, curb to curb

• 5’ sidewalks along both sides of roadway

• Approximately 120’ feet from back of sidewalk to the back of sidewalk

• No bicycle lanes/trails

• 14,000 average trips per day (2009)

• 45 MPH posted speed limit

• Served by Transit Route #16 between Enterprise Parkway and Horne Road

• Provides direct access to Del Mar College West Campus

• Provides access to West Oso High School via Bear Lane

• Provides access to West Oso and JFK Elementary Schools via Clif Maus Road

• Provides access to the VA outpatient Clinic and the Employment Center at SPID

• Few Driveways or signalized intersections

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

• Addition of a landscaped median: There is l it tle need for the existing two way center turn lane under current

conditions. The addition of a landscape median will provide opportunities to:

º Control access points, turn lanes and driveways

º Provide opportunities for pedestrian refuges for mid-block crossings, and intersection crossings

º Provide traffic calming by visually narrowing the corridor

º Enhance the corridor for all users.

• Limit access points and driveways: There are currently few access points and driveways along this corridor. By limiting

the driveway or intersection spacing and requiring cross access easements, the number of potential turning movements

will be reduced, maintaining the arterial function of the corridor and increasing safety for motorists and other users of

the roadway.

• Narrow the travel lanes and restripe to include a bicycle lane in both directions

• Incorporate the planned multi-use trail on the north side of the roadway, instead of the south, with appropriate safe

crossings, to provide additional access to Del Mar College West Campus and the potential future development as identi-

fied in the concept plan for the Destination Node

EXISTING CONDITIONS RECOMMENDATIONS

ISSUES IMPLEMENTATION STEPS1. Develop an overlay district for this Destination Node to include the Old Brownsville Road corridor

a. Include standards for access, distance, spacing, and type

b. Require cross-access easements for adjacent uses

c. Include design guidelines for landscaping, street amenities, and driveway placement

d. Coordinate with RTA on future transit needs including pads for shelters or pull out bays

2. Begin Project Development or Feasibility study to assess the need for/feasibility of:

a. Addition of a landscaped median

b. Location/type of appropriate turn lanes

c. Location of midblock crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists

d. Improvements to the existing crossings at Clif Maus Drive, Navigation/Horne Road, and Bear Lane

e. Improvements to the existing intersection of Old Brownsville Road and Airport Road

f. Access to Del Mar College West Campus for bicyclists and pedestrians

3. Coordinate with MPO/TxDOT to begin programming for needed improvements through various potential funding

programs, including: safety funds, enhancement funds, and general roadway funds.

4. Prioritize the implementation of the proposed steps through the MPO process for federal funding eligibility.

5. Design and construct improvements as funding becomes available, or in partnership with private interests who

propose development projects along the corridor.

Corpus Christi Integrated Community Sustainability PlanCORRIDOR MOBILITY CONCEPTS: Old Brownsville Road

The existing Old Brownsville Road corridor has an urban typical section with two travel lanes in

each direction and a continuous two-way left turn lane. Existing 5-foot sidewalks are set back

nearly 20 feet from the edge of curb.

The proposed alternative would provide a raised, landscaped median, narrower 11-foot travel

lanes and bicycle lanes, as well as a shared-use path on the south side.

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

EXISTING TYPICAL EXISTING SECTION PHOTOS

EXAMPLE PHOTOSALTERNATIVE TYPICAL SECTION

(1) Example four-lane divided arterial roadway with bike lanes, Chapel Hill, NC. (2) Example four-lane divided arterial roadway with bike lane and adjacent off -street shared-use path. Providing

both on-street and off -street facilities allows bicyclists to choose the facility that is most appropriate for their use and comfort level. (3) Example four-lane divided arterial roadway with adjacent

off -street shared-use path. (4) Although this 6-lane divided arterial roadway with bike lanes in Gainesville, FL has a 45 mph posted speed, all travel lanes are 11 feet wide.

1 2 3 4

OLD BROWNSVILLE ROAD