Draft Complete Frontier MPO Regional Trails Plan 2016

2016

Draft Regional Trails

Plan

As of February 23, 2016

Frontier MPO Regional Trails Plan - Draft

Cover Image: Arkansas State Criterium Championships in Downtown Fort Smith,

September 2015

Publication of this document was financed in part by funds provided by the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Transit Administration. The provision of Federal financial assistance should not be construed as denoting U.S. Government approval of plans, policies, programs or

projects contained herein.

The Frontier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) complies with all civil rights provisions of federal statues and related authorities that prohibit discrimination in

programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. Therefore, the Frontier MPO does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, or national origin, religion or disability, in the admission, access to and treatment in Frontier programs and activities, as well as MPO hiring and employment practices. Complaints or alleged discrimination

and inquires regarding the Frontier MPO nondiscrimination policies may be direct to Dianne Morrison, Title VI & Title II Coordinator, 1109 S. 16th Street; AR, 72902, (479)

785-2651 or [email protected]


Table of Contents

Chapter 1 - Introduction………...……………………………………………………………..6

Policy Background……………………………………………………………..………..6

Benefits of Trails…………………………………………………………………………6

Chapter 2 - Vision, Goals, and Objectives………………………………………………..…8

Vision Statement………………………………………………………………………...8

Goals and Objectives……………………………………………………………………8

Chapter 3 – Plan Development Process………………………………………………….....10

Active Transportation Committee……………………………………………………10

Public Outreach………………………………………………………………………...11

Public Goals………………………………………………………………………….…12

Chapter 4 – Existing Conditions…………………………………………………………..…14

Fort Smith………………………………………………………………………….……14

Bikeway System…………………………………………………………..……14

Trails and Greenways Plan……………………………………………………14

Greenwood…………………………………………………………………………..….20

Additional Trails……………………………………………………………………….22

Chapter 5 – Proposed Routes……………………………………………………………...…23

Chapter 6 – Potential Bicycle Route Types………………………………………………...28

Shared Lane Markings………………………………………………………………...28

Bike Lanes…………………………………………………………………………...….30

Bike Boulevards……………………………………………………………………...…31

Cycle Tracks…………………………………………………………………………….32

Appendix – Public Goals……………………………………………………………………..33


List of Images

Image Page

1 Public outreach poster board………………………………………………………...11

2 Citizen writing down goals at public open house in Greenwood……………...12

3 Bike Route End sign on Dodson Ave……………………………………………….14

4 Sunnymede Walking Trail…………………………………………………...............17

5 Paved multi-use trail on Massard Road………………………………………….....19

6 Paved multi-use trail on Old Greenwood Road……………………………….….19

7 Artist’s rendering of the Greg Smith River Walk…………………………………20

8 Old steel bridge and conceptual plan for the Greenwood trails system………20

9 Racer on Springhill Park Mountain Bike Trail……………………………………22

10 Hikers on Lake Alma Trail…………………………………………………………...22

11 Shared lane markings in Fayetteville, Arkansas………………………………….28

12 Shared lane marking symbol………………………………..……………………….29

13 Conventional bike lane in Del Mar, California…………………………………...30

14 Buffered bike lane in Austin, Texas………………………………………………...31

15 Bicycle boulevard in Berkeley, CA………………………………………………….32

16 One-way cycle track in Chicago, Illinois……………………………………….…..33

17 Raised cycle track in Hillsboro, Oregon…………………………………………....33

18 Raised two-way cycle track in Portland, Oregon………………………………….34


Table of Maps

Map

1 Fort Smith Bikeway, 2003…………………………….……………………………....15

2 Fort Smith Trails and Greenway Plan……………….……………………………..16

3 Bike Trails at Ben Geren Park…………………………………………………..…...18

4 Greenwood Trail Master Plan, February 2015……………………………………..21

5 Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Full Map...………………………………………23

6 Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Northern Section Zoom-In……………………24

7 Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Center Section Zoom-In………………………25

8 Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Southern Section Zoom-In……………………26

9 Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Eastern Section Zoom-In………………..…….27


Chapter 1 – Introduction

The purpose of this plan is to create an integrated network of bicycle and pedestrian routes to serve the Frontier Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) area. New routes were chosen through input from both the Active Transportation Committee and public outreach. The proposed routes link existing trail plans to each other and other MPO area communities and provide non-motorized connectivity to locations of interest such as schools and parks.

Policy Background

In accordance with Arkansas state policy, the designated routes in this plan located on roadways in Arkansas qualify for bicycle route accommodation consideration by the Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department in future projects.

The policy is found in the Arkansas Statewide Long-Range Intermodal Transportation Plan (2007) as follows:

“Accommodations for bicycles will be given due consideration when a proposed highway project is on a route that has been designated as a bicycle route by a locally adopted bicycle plan or master street plan and the Department concurs that the route should be a designated bicycle route.” (page 19)

Benefits of Trails

A regional trail network will benefit the Frontier MPO area in a multitude of ways, several of which are highlighted below.

Transportation Benefits - Improved bicycle and pedestrian transportation options promote a more equitable transportation system. The proposed routes give residents such as children and those without motor vehicle access greater mobility and independence. In addition, replacing automobile trips with active transportation modes such as walking and bicycling can relieve overall congestion by removing cars from the roads.

Health Benefits – Our nation’s automobile-dependent transportation system has contributed to a sedentary lifestyle and rising obesity rates. Whether used for recreation or transportation, bicycle and pedestrian trails provide citizens with low-cost and convenient opportunities for physical exercise. The many benefits of such exercise include reduction in obesity rates, disease prevention, and


improved mental and physical health. Any decreases in automobile trips will also benefit health by improving residents’ overall air quality.

Economic Benefits – A well-developed trail system benefits the local economy by attracting both businesses and skilled workers, increasing property value, spurring development, and stimulating the economy through recreation and tourism. In the end, the entire community benefits through both enhancing the region’s attractiveness and keeping local dollars in the community.

Increased physical activity also results in economic benefits through reduced healthcare costs and increased worker productivity. Residents can also save money which would have been spent on vehicle use or purchase. Finally, active transportation causes minimal damage to roads, saving money from reconstruction and maintenance.

Together, the transportation, health, and economic benefits of the Regional Trails Plan work to enhance quality of life for all residents in the Frontier MPO area. This plan is also in line with the MPO’s goal of implementing a “complete streets” policy for the area.


Chapter 2 – Vision, Goals, and Objectives

Vision Statement:

A regional integrated bicycle and pedestrian network will support and encourage active transportation through a safe, convenient, and comfortable system which enhances the local economy while increasing connectivity, mobility, equity, health, and quality of life.

Goals and Objectives

Goal 1: Connect communities

Objectives:

Connect communities to each other via a bicycle and pedestrian network

Connect existing trail plans to surrounding communities via a bicycle and pedestrian network

Connect existing trail plans to each other via a bicycle and pedestrian network

Goal 2: Connect points of interest

Objectives:

Connect local schools to a bicycle and pedestrian network, providing a safe, convenient, and accessible transportation option for students

Connect local parks to a bicycle and pedestrian network

Connect employment centers, shopping destinations, neighborhoods, and other points of interest to a bicycle and pedestrian network

Goal 3: Connect to the natural environment

Objectives:

Connect residents and visitors to the natural environmental through an attractive outdoor bicycle and pedestrian network

Connect residents and visitors to parks, greenways, rivers, and multi-use trails through a bicycle and pedestrian network

Connect residents and visitors to the natural environmental through a convenient, safe, and attractive bicycle and pedestrian network

Encourage connection to the natural environment through improved air quality by replacing motor vehicle trips with bicycling and walking


Goal 4: Support the local economy

Objectives:

Increase the prevalence of recreational bicycling and walking in the region to keep recreational spending local

Enhance the image of the region to attract workers and businesses

Provide citizens low-cost alternatives to motor vehicle transportation


Chapter 3 – Plan Development Process

The plan development process consisted of two stages. In the first stage, the Active Transportation Committee identified appropriate routes for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Next, the routes were presented to the public at public open house meetings, where further modifications were suggested.

Active Transportation Committee

The Active Transportation Committee consists of community leaders and stakeholders with an interest in bicycle and pedestrian transportation in the region. The committee met on a monthly or bi-monthly basis in 2014 and 2015.

The committee consisted of the following members, listed along with the organization each represented:

Shirley Bearden Western Arkansas Runners Scott Chapman Citizen/Scott’s Bike Shop DeAnna Copeland Western Arkansas Runners Randy Davis Citizen Sasha Grist Western Arkansas Planning and Development

District Bill Hanna Citizen Joe Hurst City of Van Buren Michael Johns Citizen Eric Karlsson Mercy Cycling Eugene Kersh Citizen Michael LeJong Architect, City of Greenwood Drew Linder Fort Smith Trails and Greenways Committee Richard McKinney Citizen Casey Millspaugh Fort Smith Parks and Recreation Commission Ivy Owen Fort Chaffee Redevelopment Authority Meighan Pendergrass University of Arkansas at Fort Smith Nancy Raney Citizen Doug Reinert City of Fort Smith Bob Robinson Citizen Kerrie Taber Western Arkansas Runners Channon Toland Sebastian County Elizabeth Underwood University of Arkansas at Fort Smith Mark Yardley City of Alma

The committee identified potential routes on existing roadways. The routes were

chosen in order to connect local and regional points of interest, such as schools and parks. In addition, the new routes were chosen in order to connect to the existing local trails and trail plans.


Public Outreach

Members of the public contributed to route development at public open house meetings held at various municipalities throughout the region. The meetings were held at the following dates and locations:

Pocola, Pocola Town Hall, March 23, 2015; 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

Greenwood, Greenwood Pavilion, March 24, 2015; 11:00 am – 1:00 pm

Fort Smith, Fort Smith Riverfront Park, March 25, 2015; 11:00 am – 1:00 pm

Van Buren, Van Buren Municipal Complex, March 26, 2015; 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

Meetings were advertised via the Southwest Times Record, radio news reports, flyers, social media, and Active Transportation Committee members. In total, 38 citizens attended. At each meeting, Frontier MPO staff explained the purpose and goals of the Regional Trails Plan and presented maps featuring all the proposed routes. The maps were displayed on large poster boards, as seen in Image 1 below. Citizens were provided pens and invited to add or change any routes on the maps.

Image 1. Public outreach poster board.


Public Goals

At each open house, participants also had the opportunity to write their own goals for the plan, as seen in Image 2 below.

Image 2. Citizen writing down goals at public open house in Greenwood.

Within the goals, the following common themes emerged: (1) specific route recommendations, (2) more pedestrian and bicycle facilities, (3) connectivity to schools, parks, trails, and the river, and (4) support for the 2015 ballot measure to allocate street tax funding to trails and greenways.

All comments are typed below and photographs of the original handwritten comments are in Appendix – Public Goals on page 35.

yes please more sidewalks. I am a runner and people just try and hit you! Love to see the river used as trails like Tulsa. w/ water fountains! Restrooms along the trail! Dora Rd to Ft. Smith.

To - connect the walking trail system to all school locations - connect the G’wood trail system with Chaffee trails - ADD SHARROWS TO MARK TRAILS/BIKE PATHS - CONNECT PUBLIC PARKS

-East –West trail in Ft Smith


-Dora Rd. to VB connection -Sharrows + Signage focused on areas where traffic needs to be slowed.

Connect trails, don’t just fix a place to Ride, but no biking path to get to them or to another trail

VOTE YES! FOR TRAILS/BIKEWAYS ON MAY 12

Add bikeway to VB-FS Broadway Bridge – this would connect VB & FS bike & walkways and expand the benefits of each. Trail into city’s new Lee Creek Park along No. 1st St. – this would connect this new park to Mike Meyer Riverfront Park and from there to Main St. Downtown

Create long paths for longer safe rides. Country rides would be nice. Vote Yes!!

Regional bike trails for walking/biking Connect FS + VB by Bridge walk bike trail


Chapter 4 – Existing Conditions

The Frontier MPO area currently features two major multi-use trail and bicycle systems: (1) the City of Fort Smith’s Bikeway System and Trails and Greenway Plan, and (2) the City of Greenwood’s multi-use trail system. The two systems include both completed facilities and planned future expansions.

Fort Smith

Bikeway System

The Fort Smith Bikeway system consists primarily of shared road bike routes, marked with “Bike Route” signs, such as seen in Image 3.

Image 3. Bike Route End sign on Dodson Ave.

The bikeway system provides residents with an integrated network with bicycling connections to destinations of interest such as parks, libraries, schools, and bus stops. The complete Fort Smith Bikeway system is shown in Map 1 on page 11.

Trails and Greenways Plan

As seen in Map 2 on page 15, the Fort Smith Trails and Greenways Committee’s current plan (not yet adopted) recommends 35 miles of multi-use trails along with bike lanes (see Chapter 6) and shared lane markings, known as “sharrows’ (see Chapter 6). This plan is a modified version of the City’s Trails and Greenways Master Plan, adopted in 2004.


Map 1. Fort Smith Bikeway, 2003.


Map 2. Fort Smith Trails and Greenway Plan, January 2015.

Note: The map above has not yet been adopted by the City of Fort Smith.


The proposed multi-use trails are separated from the roadways, providing a unique opportunity for transportation and recreation. The trail system also connects to the area’s geography by running along the Arkansas River. The bicycle routes will enhance and expand the existing bikeway system.

As seen in Map 2, several paved multi-use trails already exist in the City of Fort Smith. Foremost among these trails are the bike trails at Sebastian County’s Ben Geren Park. Map 3 on page 18 features the park’s complete 17 mile system of paved and off-road bike trails, including trails extending outside of the park itself.

In addition, on the Northeast of Fort Smith at the eastern end of Grand Avenue is the Sunnymede Walking Trail, as seen in Image 4 below.

Image 4. Sunnymede Walking Trail (Google Maps, 2013).


Map 3. Bike Trails at Ben Geren Park.


Images 5 and 6 below show two additional existing paved multi-use trails in Fort Smith,

as included on Map 2.

Image 5. Paved multi-use trail on Massard Road (Google Streetview, April 2014).

Image 6. Paved multi-use trail on Old Greenwood Road (Google Streetview, September 2015).

Also seen on Map 2 is the Greg Smith River Walk (labeled River Front West), as depicted Image 7 below. The trail is currently under construction on the Northwest of


the City near Garrison Bridge and will connect Harry E. Kelley River Park to the Rice Carden Levee trail, which will be paved in 2016.

Image 7. Artist’s rendering of the Greg Smith River Walk (Times Record, 3/26/15).

Greenwood

The City of Greenwood is also developing a multi-use trail system centered around Greenwood Lake and featuring unique amenities such as a bike skills park and a renovated old steel bridge, as seen in Image 8 below.

Image 8. Old steel bridge and conceptual plan for the Greenwood trails system (MAHG Architecture).


Map 4 below is the trail master plan as of February 2015.

Map 4. Greenwood Trail Master Plan, February 2015 (MAHG Architecture).


Additional Trails

The trails above and listed in this section do not constitute an exhaustive list of all trail facilities in the area but represent the largest and most significant systems. Other notable trails include in the area include (1) the Springhill Park Mountain Bike Trail (see Image 9) near Barling, a 10-mile route with winds, twists, and loops; and (2) the Lake Alma Hiking Trail (see Image 10), a 3.8-mile hiking trail located next to the Lake Alma Wildlife Observation Trail and Park. Both trails are included on the proposed route maps in Chapter 5. In addition, many local parks also feature sidewalks and walking trails.

Image 9. Racer on Springhill Park Mountain Bike Trail.

Image 10. Hikers on Lake Alma Trail (Photograph by Jim Warnock).


Chapter 5 - Proposed Routes

Map 5. Proposed Regional Trails Plan - Full Map.


Map 6. Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Northern Section Zoom-In.


Map 7. Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Center Section Zoom-In.


Map 8. Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Southern Section Zoom-In.


Map 9. Proposed Regional Trails Plan – Eastern Section Zoom-In.

Maps 5-9 above and on the previous pages show the full Regional Trails Plan and zoom-in maps of different sections. Most of the proposed routes are located on existing roadways. However, several routes are located off of existing roadways, such as the multi-use trails in Van Buren and trail along the levee in Crawford County.

As seen on the maps, the routes provide connections between existing trails plans and to surrounding communities in the region. Likewise, many routes provide connections to local schools and parks. This plan does not make specific recommendations for route designs; however, descriptions of potential options are included in Chapter 6.


Chapter 6 – Potential Bicycle Route Types

This chapter will give a short description of potential bicycle infrastructure and markings for the proposed routes. The four options which will be described are the following: (1) shared lane markings, (2) bike lanes, (3) bike boulevards, and (4) cycle tracks. Most of the information and text in this chapter was obtained from the National Association of City Transportation Officials’ (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide.

Shared Lane Markings

Shared lane markings (SLMs), as seen in Image 9, are road markings used to indicate a shared lane environment for bicycles and automobiles. The shared lane marking is not a facility type; it is a pavement marking with a variety of uses to support a complete bikeway network.

Image 11. Shared lane markings in Fayetteville, Arkansas.

SLMs are also known as “sharrows,” a name formed by a combination of the words “share” and “arrow.” As seen in Image 10 below, sharrow symbols in the United States feature a bicycle underneath two chevrons – upside down “v”-shaped markings pointing in the travel direction.


Image 12. Shared lane marking symbol (Federal Highway Administration).

Shared lane marking benefits include the following:

Encouraging bicyclists to position themselves safely in lanes too narrow for a motor vehicle and a bicycle to comfortably travel side by side within the same traffic lane.

Alerting motor vehicle drivers to the potential presence of bicyclists.

Alerting road users of the lateral position bicyclists are expected to occupy within the travel lane

Indicating a proper path for bicyclists through difficult or potentially hazardous situations, such as railroad tracks.

Advertising the presence of bikeway routes to all users.

Providing a wayfinding element along bike routes.

Demonstrated to increase the distance between bicyclists and parked cars, keeping bicyclists out of the “door zone.”

Encouraging safe passing by motorists.

Require no additional street space.

Reducing the incidence of sidewalk riding.

Reducing the incidence of wrong-way bicycling.

Shared lane markings should not be considered a substitute for bike lanes, cycle tracks, or other separation treatments where these types of facilities are otherwise warranted or space permits. Generally, they are also not appropriate on streets with a speed limit above 35 mph.


Bike Lanes

Bike lanes are the most common bicycle facility in the United States. As seen in Image 13 below, a bike lane designates an exclusive space for bicyclists through the use of pavement markings and signage. They enable bicyclists to ride at their preferred speed without interference from prevailing traffic conditions.

Image 13. Conventional bike lane in Del Mar, California (NACTO).

Bike lane benefits include the following:

Increasing bicyclists’ comfort and confidence on busy streets.

Creating separation between bicyclists and automobiles.

Increasing predictability of bicyclist and motorist positioning and interaction.

Increasing total capacities of streets carrying mixed bicycle and motor vehicle traffic.

Visually reminding motorists of bicyclists’ right to the street.

Bike lanes are most helpful on streets with average daily traffic >= 3,000 and speed limits >= 25 mph. Compared to shared roads, bike lanes are more comfortable for a larger portion of the population. The Toronto Cycling Study found that while 73% of all existing bicyclists are comfortable riding on major roads with bike lanes, only 54% reported feeling comfortable on major roads with sharrow markings1.

1 Ipso Reid/City of Toronto. (2010, January 12). City of Toronto Cycling Study: Tracking Report (1999 and 2009). Retrieved from http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toronto/transportation_services/cycling/files/ /pdf/cycling_study_1999_and_2009.pdf

http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/gallery/2012_conventionalbikelane/bl_delmar.jpg


Bike lane types include buffered bike lanes, such as seen in Image 14 below. Buffered bike lanes feature an added buffered space between the bicycle lane and the motor vehicle travel lane. Buffered bike lanes are typically applied on streets with high travel speeds, high travel volumes, and/or high amounts of truck traffic; and with extra lanes or extra lane width.

Image 14. Buffered bike lane in Austin, Texas (NACTO).

Buffered bike lane provide the following additional benefits:

Provide greater shy distance between motor vehicles and bicyclists

Provide space for bicyclists to pass another bicyclist without encroaching into the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane.

Encourage bicyclists to ride outside of the door zone when buffer is between parked cars and bike lane.

Provide a greater space for bicycling without making the bike lane appear so wide that it might be mistaken for a travel lane or a parking lane.

Appeal to a wider cross-section of bicycle users.

Encourage bicycling by contributing to the perception of safety among users of the bicycle network.

Bike Boulevards

Bicycle boulevards are streets with low motorized traffic volumes and speeds, designated and designed to give bicycle travel priority. Bicycle boulevards, such as seen in Image 15, use design treatments such as signs, pavement markings, speed

http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/gallery/2012_bufferedbikelane/bufferedbikelane_austin02.jpg


management, and volume management to discourage through trips by motor vehicles and create safe, convenient bicycle crossings of busy arterial streets.

Image 13. Bicycle boulevard in Berkeley, CA (www.stocktoncitylimits.com).

Bike boulevards provide the following benefits:

Provide comfortable and attractive places to bicycle, attracting people of all ages and abilities.

Can make cost-effective use of existing roadways and connections with a series of relatively minor treatments that substantially improve bicycling conditions on local streets.

Can benefit residents with reduced vehicle speeds and less through traffic.

Can benefit pedestrians and other users through crossing improvements, wayfinding, landscaping, and reduced motor vehicle speeds and volumes.

Cycle Tracks

A cycle track (also known as a protected bike lane) is an exclusive bike facility that combines the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane. A cycle track is physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. If at sidewalk level, a curb or median separates the cycle track from motor traffic, while different pavement color/texture separates the cycle track from the sidewalk. If at street level, they can be separated from motor traffic by raised medians, on-street parking, or bollards. By separating cyclists from motor traffic,

http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/10a/shared_lane_berkeley.jpg


cycle tracks can offer a higher level of security than bike lanes and are attractive to a wider spectrum of the public.

Types of cycle tracks include one-way cycle tracks, raised cycle tracks, and two-way cycle tracks, as seen in Images 16, 17, and 18.

Image 16. One-way cycle track in Chicago, Illinois (NACTO).

Image 17. Raised cycle track in Hillsboro, Oregon (NACTO).

http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/gallery/2012_onewayprotectedcycletrack/protectedcycletrack_2_chicago_il.jpg

http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/gallery/2012_raisedcycletrack/raisedcycletrack_hillsboro-or_credit-will-vanlue.jpg


Image 18. Raised two-way cycle track in Portland, Oregon (NACTO).

To conclude, cycle track benefits include the following:

Dedicate and protect space for bicyclists by improving perceived comfort and safety.

Eliminate risk and fear of collisions with over-taking vehicles.

Reduce risk of “dooring” compared to a bike lane and eliminate the risk of a doored bicyclist being run over by a motor vehicle.

More attractive to a wide range of bicyclists at all levels and ages.

http://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/gallery/2012_twowaycycletrack/raised-cycle-track_portland02.jpg


Appendix – Public Goals


Frontier Metropolitan Planning Organization

Frontier MPO Regional Trails Plan

Sasha Grist, Executive Director

** Dianne Morrison, AICP, Director * Luke Tia, Transportation Planner * Primary Responsibility ** Secondary Responsibility M:\Bike and Ped Plan\Regional Ped_Bike Plan\Text\Complete Plan\Complete Frontier MPO Regional Trails Plan 2016.docx

Draft Complete Frontier MPO Regional Trails Plan 2016

Documents

Transcript of Draft Complete Frontier MPO Regional Trails Plan 2016