Hale iwa Improvement District Project

Transcription

1 Hale iwa Improvement District Project Hale iwa, North Shore, O ahu October 10, 2017 Public Informational Meeting Environmental Impact Statement Preparation Notice Waialua Elementary School Waialua Beach Road Waialua, HI Department of Design and Construction City and County of Honolulu

2 Meeting Purpose / Desired Outcomes 2 Community and landowners understand the alternatives, issues and process. Obtain community and landowner input on the ID alternatives and on environmental, social and technical issues for evaluation in the EIS. Answer questions about the project, the ID and the EIS process.

3 Introductions 3 City and County of Honolulu Robert Kroning, P.E., DDC Director Ann Shimatsu, P.E., DDC Project Manager, Civil Division Bob Sarae, P.E., DDC Civil Division Harrison Rue, DPP, Community Building and TOD Administrator R. M. Towill Corporation Jimmy Yamamoto, P.E., Vice President Jim Niermann, AICP LEED AP, Principal Planner Gordon Ring, P.E., LEED AP, Principal Engineer Michele Leong, Planner

4 Opening Remarks 4

5 Housekeeping 5 Sign-in Sheet Meeting Documentation Comment Forms & Box Refreshments Restrooms

6 Meeting Agenda 6 Presentation by the Project Team. Project Update Conceptual Alternatives for EIS EISPN Comment Period Full-group Discussion / Q & A

7 Ground Rules 7 Stick to the agenda. Save questions for the end. Reference slide #. Listen respectfully. Respond to ideas and issues, not individuals.

8 Hale iwa Improvement District Project Area 8

9 Improvement District 9 City Council Resolution , CD1 1. Walkways 2. Landscaping 3. Undergrounding Utilities ROH Chapter 14, Articles 23 to 29 Establishes Improvement District Process

10 Improvement District Process 10 Costs shared by the City and adjacent landowners. Utility companies share a portion of utility costs. Basis for cost assessment may include: Street frontage / lot area Land use Type of improvements Assessed value of property The intent is to make it work.

11 Complete Streets Ordinance 11 Requires the City to employ a multi-modal approach to roadway projects. Goal is to balance needs of pedestrians, bicycles, transit and motor vehicles. Requires multi-modal traffic study. ROH Section 14-33

12 Community Involvement / EIS Process 12 Community Involvement, Agency Consultation Background Research Special Studies Community Interviews Agency Consultation Site Conditions Analysis Engineering Analysis Preliminary Design Concepts Workshops #1 & #2 Prelim. Alternatives Multi modal Study Design Meetings EIS Prep Notice Pre Draft EIS Meeting(s) Alternatives Review Draft EIS Draft EIS Meeting(s) Public Review Period Final EIS Preparation Pre Final EIS Meeting ID Alternative Final EIS / ROD

13 Current Status 13 EISPN Comment Period Conceptual Alternatives Multi-modal Traffic Study in progress Agency Consultation ongoing Special Studies for EIS ongoing

14 Key Feedback So Far 14 Strong support for pedestrian improvements Preserve rural character and human scale Keep the ID improvements simple Preference to keep the road as-is, no left-turn lanes No strong preference for overhead vs. underground utilities (except costs) Parking concern over loss of street frontage parking, support for centralized parking Concern about ID costs and allocation Concern about losing land to the project Construction impacts hard on small businesses

15 Hale iwa Improvement District 15

16 Hale iwa Improvement District 16

17 Existing Conditions 17 Two-lane, rural commercial street ROW width varies from 30 to 50 No existing walkways except in isolated locations. No bike lanes. Buildings located near roadway Accustomed street-front parking Trees and utilities located near roadway Bus service through town 13 bus stops Congested conditions during daytime (visitor traffic, busses) 60-foot road widening setback

18 Design Criteria 18 Low-Speed Road Drainage maintain exist. flow pattern Multi-modal design - improve experience for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit Consider Complete Streets features Dimension Guidelines 22 Roadway 6 Walkway (8 at bus stops and commercial core) 5 Bike lane (If Provided) 4 Buffer for landscaping, drainage and furniture Overhead and Underground Utilities

19 Design Summary 19 Conceptual Alternatives Alt ROW Alt 2 42 ROW Alt 3 52 to 56 Complete Streets Treatments Raised Crosswalk Bike Lanes Furniture zone / buffer Traffic Circles Parking perpendicular, parallel, angled

20 Typical Road Sections 65 to 69 ROW 20 Dimensions may be modified in final design.

21 Typical Road Sections 42 ROW 21 Dimensions may be modified in final design.

22 Typical Road Sections 52 to 56 ROW 22 Dimensions may be modified in final design.

23 Alternative 1: 65 to 69 ROW 23

24 Alternative 1: 65 to 69 ROW 24

25 Alternative 2: 42 ROW 25

26 Alternative 2: 42 ROW 26

27 Alternative 3: 52 to 56 ROW 27

28 Alternative 3: 52 to 56 ROW 28

29 Complete Streets 29 The City is required by ordinance to consider complete streets principles in transportation project planning Improves mobility for all street users. Good for business. Features that might work in Hale iwa: Bicycle Facilities Raised Crosswalks Furniture Zone / Buffer Parklets Traffic Circles

30 Bicycle Facilities 30 5-ft. wide bike lane, separated from walkway Sharrows share the travel lane with motor vehicles Improve bicycling convenience and comfort to encourage less reliance on motor vehicles Connect to regional bike path system Equitable access for kids, teens, workers

31 Bicycle Facilities 31

32 Raised Crosswalks 32 Table-top crosswalk across travel lane. Raised intersection. Provides traffic calming (speed table). Improves visibility for drivers and pedestrians. Creates landmark.

33 Raised Crosswalks 33

34 Furniture Zone / Buffer 34 4-foot wide area to provide separation from travel way and pedestrian walkway. Used for: Landscaping Drainage Utilities Street Furniture (benches, signs, trash cans)

35 Furniture Zone / Buffer 35

36 Furniture Zone / Buffer 36

37 Furniture Zone / Buffer 37

38 Parklet 38 Parklet Seating, landscape features, shade/shelter. Provides social/respite space, creates a landmark. Can be customized to fit into available space, minimizing impacts to the adjacent area.

39 Parklet 39

40 Parklet 40

41 Traffic Circles 41 Eliminates stop-control, allows continuous flow. Alternative to left turn lanes. Allows cars to make a U-turn instead of left turns. Improves motor vehicle movement and pedestrian access into adjacent properties. Minimizes turn conflicts. Creates a landmark/entry feature.

42 Traffic Circles Hale`iwa Road 42

43 Traffic Circles Hale`iwa Road 43

44 Parking 44 Space availability ROW, physical constraints. Safety / integration of parking with walkway design. Convenience / business needs (customers, loading, deliveries). Design: Perpendicular Parallel Angled

45 Parking 45

46 Parking 46 Street frontage parking: Parallel parking. Pā ia, Maui Makawao, Maui

47 Parking 47 Street frontage parking: angled parking. Reverse angle safety parking Nose-in angle parking San Francisco, CA Makawao, Maui

48 Bus Stops Bus stops create breaks in traffic that facilitate left turns and pedestrian crossings. 3 bus stops are candidates for removal due to low ridership and proximity to adjacent bus stops. B B B B B B B B B B B B B

49 Alternatives Cost Comparison 49 Cost categories: Construction mobilization/demobilization Demolition Utility Relocation electrical/telcom, water, lighting Paving, Concrete Walkways & Driveways Drainage improvements Landscaping and street furnishings Land acquisition Tie-in to property frontage Building retrofit

50 Alternatives Cost Comparison Order of magnitude costs (subject to change pending design): 50 Cost Category Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Construction Mob, Traffic Control $3,250,000 $1,710,000 $2,375,000 Travel way Construction $5,650,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Bike Lane Construction $1,120,000 $0 $1,120,000 Walkway Construction $3,030,000 $2,440,000 $2,590,000 Furniture Zone landscaping & features $600,000 $300,000 $300,000 Utility Relocation $4,340,000 $1,990,000 $2,530,000 Drainage Improvements $6,425,000 $2,560,000 $3,000,000 Contingency (20%) $4,885,000 $2,100,000 $2,685,000 Total $29,300,000 $12,600,000 $16,100,000 Does not include costs for: Land / Easement Acquisition Building Upgrades / Retrofit Tie-ins to existing property frontage Undergrounding Electrical cost estimate = $14,200,000 Traffic Circle cost estimate = $600,000 (excluding land acquisition and property adjustments)

51 Basis for ID Cost Allocation 51 Street frontage / lot area Land use / zoning Type of improvements Value of existing, impacted improvements Assessed market value of property Utility company cost-share

52 Project Schedule 52 Key Project Milestones: Complete Project Alternative Designs for Inclusion in EIS Summer 2018 Complete EIS Summer 2019 Complete Preliminary ID Report Fall 2020 Council Action on the Preliminary ID Report 2021

53 Q & A 53 Listen respectfully. Respond to ideas and issues, not individuals One person speaks at a time. Allow everyone to speak once before speaking a second time. Keep comments and discussion concise and to the point.

54 Q & A 54

55 What s Next? 55 EISPN Comment Period October 23, 2017 Finalize multi-modal study and alternatives. Prepare Draft EIS for publication Fall Work with City agencies to review alternatives. Next community meeting summer 2018.

56 56 EISPN Comments Due: October 23, 2017 Ms. Ann Shimatsu, P.E., Project Manager Department of Design and Construction City and County of Honolulu 650 South King Street, 15 th Floor Honolulu, HI 96813

57 Contact: 57 James Niermann, AICP, LEED AP Planning Project Coordinator Phone: (808) R. M. Towill Corporation 2024 North King Street Suite 200 Honolulu, Hawaii 96819

58 Department of Design and Construction City and County of Honolulu MAHALO