HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-25-16 CC Mtg - A4. Transportation Improvements Policy Discussion
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Craig Woolard, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: Transportation Improvements Policy Discussion
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action
MEETING DATE: July 25, 2016
KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Over the past several years, important improvements to planning and funding Bozeman’s
transportation system have occurred that include:
• A complete assessment of pavement condition.
• The local street reconstruction policy (and the reconstruction of two streets – Story and
Wallace).
• Additional funding for pavement maintenance.
• The creation of an arterial and collector district to provide funds, through a city-wide
assessment, to augment impact fees to complete construction of arterial and collector
roadways and intersections.
• Improved processes for proposing and approving entire corridor designs.
• An update of the transportation master plan (in progress).
The 5-year capital improvement plan (CIP) allocates impact fees and transportation assessments to projects that improve Bozeman’s transportation system. The improvements in transportation funding have allowed a CIP to be developed that addresses priority needs in the transportation
network rather than projects driven by specific development projects. Projects in the current
capital plan primarily address roadways and intersections at or beyond capacity with a failing
level of service.
171
Despite improved funding and scheduled capital improvement, Bozeman’s transportation system
continues to be stressed by the pace of development. While the arterial and collector district
assessment, when combined with impact fees, improves transportation system funding, it only addresses a portion of the transportation network needs. Recent traffic counts and modelling
efforts conducted as part of the transportation master plan (TMP) update indicate a system with
multiple current and projected failures that remain as unfunded improvements.
Figure 1 shows the current level of service for 63 intersections that were evaluated within the TMP planning area. These data represent the most current system wide information available on
the performance of Bozeman’s network. 20 Intersections currently operate at or below the City’s
current level of service (LOS) “C” standard, 7 of which are to be upgraded per the City’s 5-year
CIP. Figure 2 shows the projected future (2040) conditions based on percentage growth rates
from travel demand modeling, assuming the current capital projects are completed. In 2040, 40 intersections in the planning area fail the LOS standard. These projections assume completion of
the projects in the current 5 year CIP. At the current pace of infrastructure improvements, and
assuming arterial and collector district funding and impact fee funding continue as planned and
keep pace with inflation, approximately half of the of the required intersection upgrades will
occur from 2021 to 2040.
Figure 1. Current Intersection Level of Service
172
Figure 2. Projected Intersection Level of Service in the Year 2040
The current intersection LOS status of Bozeman’s transportation system, the requirements in the current development code and the pace of growth have created a situation where clear policy guidance from the Commission is required.
Bozeman’s Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 38.24.060.B.4 requires that all
intersections within one-half mile of a proposed development meet a LOS of “C” over a 15 year planning period. Should traffic studies indicate that that LOS cannot be met, the LOS deficiencies must be resolved before the development project can be completed.
When the data shown in Figures 1 and 2, the UDC language and the currently annexed land
available for development are considered together, clear implications for future development projects become apparent. The cumulative impact of delaying or deferring transportation
improvements while allowing development to occur has resulted in a situation where few new
development projects can occur without impacting an intersection that is failing or projected to
fail. Some, but not all, of the failing intersections are in the current 5-year CIP and will be
completed over the next several years. However, these projects are not keeping pace with new development. Many intersections that are impacted by development are not on the current 5
year CIP, and considering the number of projected intersections failures and the projected
funding for these improvements, many failing intersections may not be scheduled for
improvements for many years.
Public Works staff have been operating under the broad guidance to resolve infrastructure issues
for proposed developments. And as a result, creative solutions have facilitated private
development. Examples include allowing development (i.e., building permits) to proceed
173
concurrently with roadway and intersection improvements. Provisions for these deviations from
the Unified Development Code (UDC) have been presented to the Commission as part of the
development review packages. The administrative authority provided to the Public Works
Director in section 38.34.010.E.3 of the UDC has also been used to facilitate development. The primary use of that discretion has been to consider any failing intersection identified and funded
on the 5-year CIP as meeting the LOS standard within the planning horizon thus eliminating the
need for that deficiency to be addressed by the proposed development.
To date, resolving development related transportation impacts using these approaches has been ad hoc. However, over the last several months, nearly every proposed development impacts
multiple failing intersections. The needed improvements are off-site improvements for nearly
every development. In most cases, at least one intersection is impacted where there is no
foreseeable plan to address the LOS deficiency. Based on the current pace of development and
the status of the transportation network, staff anticipates this trend to continue. Continued use of an ad hoc approach under these circumstances is inappropriate.
Following the UDC as written requires developers to remedy these deficiencies before
development could be approved. Most developers assert that (1) these additional costs cannot
be economically born by their projects alone and (2) they are only partially responsible for the deficiencies in the arterial and collector system and should not be required to remedy the entire
deficiency before development can occur. In the majority of cases, the impact of any single
proposed development is a small part of the overall traffic demand of an intersection. But the
cumulative impact of multiple projects has resulted in failing intersections and associated road
sections.
Both staff and the development community need to understand the will of the Commission as to
developments that impact failing intersections. Staff recommends that the Commission formally
adopt a policy that recognizes intersections and associated roadways on the 3 year CIP (funded
through a combination of impact fees and arterial and collector assessments) as meeting the LOS standard. Proposed development could proceed immediately without contributing to these off-
site improvements. Staff recommends allowing the Public Works Director to grant a LOS
waiver under these conditions and limit the use of variances to for truly exceptional
circumstances as they were intended. Draft ordinance language codifying this approach is
attached for your review. Upon receiving Commission direction and comment, staff will proceed with an ordinance change.
Beyond this policy recommendation, staff suggests the following as potential options for the
Commission to consider in providing direction.
• Adhere to the UDC as written and require failing intersections to be corrected before
development can occur (i.e., before development approval). This option will require the
developer to either wait for improvements to be made as part of the capital program, or
remedy the failure before development can proceed. For some developments, we
anticipate that the required improvements will be off site and in some cases required right
of way may not be dedicated.
174
• Relax the LOS standard for intersections and allow development to proceed without
addressing current LOS deficiencies. For intersections that are complete, relaxation of
the LOS standard acknowledges that no further improvements are planned for completed
intersections. Relaxing LOS standards on incomplete intersections defers improvements
to the future with no formal plan to remedy the deficiencies may make completion of the
facility more difficult in the future and effect future impact fee assessments.
• Develop a cash-in-lieu of infrastructure program that allows the developer to make a
proportional contribution to the required improvements before significant building can
occur. Such a program could accelerate capital improvements in some situations. But
establishing a simple and easily administered program will be challenging because
varying patterns and status of development make every situation unique. And a cash-in-
lieu program that funds only partial intersection improvements will still require funding
from impact fees and/or the arterial and collector assessments that is inadequate to meet
the projected needs.
• Create Special Improvement Districts (SID) to address deficiencies before development
can proceed. In addition to being administratively burdensome, SID’s can be protested
and it is not clear what the extent of an SID would be for an arterial and/or collector
intersection. Due to the administrative challenges, historically only one intersection
upgrade has been completed in the City using an SID.
• Increase the level of funding in existing programs.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: As discussed above.
FISCAL EFFECTS: No changes to existing transportation funding mechanisms or levels are
being proposed as part of the staff policy recommendation. Commission direction on how to proceed with unfunded improvements could have significant staffing and financial implications.
ALTERNATIVES:
Adopt Staff recommendations.
Other alternatives as suggested by the Commission.
Attachments: Draft Ordinance Language for Section 38.24.060 – Street Improvement
Standards
I. Suggested adjustments to 38.34.010:
E. Subject to 38.24.060, Tthe director of public service shall review and upon recommendation from the applicable advisory bodies as needed approve, approve with conditions or deny the following
development elements and processes:
1. A waiver of the requirement to extend water, sewer, and streets to the perimeter of property
being developed per section 38.23.070;
2. Water rights as authorized in 38.23.180;
175
3. Exceptions to the level of service standards established in 38.24.060.B.4.
II. Suggested adjustments to 38.24.060:
Sec. 38.24.060. - Street improvement standards.
A. All street improvements shall be designed by and constructed under the supervision of a
professional civil engineer, registered in the state, and shall meet or exceed the right-of-way and construction standards adopted by the city (including but not limited to an adopted transportation
plan or specifications manual) and required for the type of street to be constructed.
B. Plans and specifications for all public or private streets (including but not limited to curb, gutter, storm
drainage, street lighting and sidewalks), shall be provided to and approved by the review authority. The developer shall provide professional engineering services for construction inspection, post-
construction certifications and preparation of Mylar record drawings. The plans and specifications shall be approved and a preconstruction conference shall be conducted before any construction is
initiated on the street improvements.
1. Surfacing. A pavement design report, based upon specific site soil data and design-year traffic
loading conditions, prepared by a professional engineer, or other qualified professional approved by the review authority, shall be submitted to the review authority for approval prior to
plan and specification submittal if using the self-certification process or with the plans and specifications if using the standard process. Pavement design shall be in accordance with the
city design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications.
2. Alleys. In subdivisions where alleys are proposed, a 20-foot-wide right-of-way shall be provided. The driving surface of the alley shall be 16 feet wide and shall be improved with gravel.
a. Subdividers may elect to pave subdivision alleys provided that adequate stormwater facilities are available.
b. Alleys shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the city design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard
specifications, and subject to approval by the city engineer.
c. Alleys used for backing under 38.25.020.D shall be designed to provide the required aisle width.
3. Traffic progression. Traffic progression will be of paramount importance. Consequently, all
potential intersections with signals will be placed on quarter-mile points unless otherwise approved by the review authority.
4. Level of service standards. All arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and
collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. A development shall be
approved only if the LOS requirements are met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole.
a. Exception: If an intersection within the area required to be studied by section 38.41.060.A.12 does not meet LOS "C" and the intersection has been fully constructed to
its maximum lane and turning movement capacity, then an LOS of less than "C" is
acceptable.
b. Exception: Pursuant to 38.24.060, he Director of Public Works review authority may grant a waiver from the accept an LOS of less than "C" at a specific intersection if the Director
determines:
176
1) granting of a waiver from the level of service for the intersection would not be contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest;
2) improvements to the intersection to reduce the overall level of service to a “C” or better are currently scheduled for construction within three (3) years as shown on the most
recently adopted Transportation Capital Improvement Plan;
3) all right of way necessary for the required intersection improvements have been obtained
by the City or by the Montana Department of Transportation;
4) the Commission has approved financing plan for the intersection improvements; and
5) the Director of Administrative Services has indicated all financing for the intersection improvements has been obtained.
A waiver granted under this subsection is valid for a period of one (1) year from the date of the waiver and applies only to the property for which the waiver is granted.
c. If the Director of Public Works does not grant a waiver from the level of service standard under 38.24.060.B.4, a Developer may request a variance from the requirements of this
section. If a variance is granted from the requirements of this section, the variance applies only to the specific development proposal fro which it was granted and shall not be
considered evidence for any other development proposal.
(1) A variance to allow a lesser LOS was approved not more than two years prior to the date an application for development being reviewed is determined to be adequate for
review;
(2) The request was made in writing with the application; and
(3) The circumstances are in the professional judgment of the review authority substantially the same as when the variance was granted.
177