31 - ALABASTER FORWARD

Transcription

Alabaster Forward
City of Alabaster
Comprehensive Plan Update
r k Shop P
l ay
e Wo
Li v
Comprehensive Plan Update
Appendix D | Transportation Plan
February 2016
Alabaster Forward:
Appendix D Transportation Plan
“We are Alabaster, Shelby County’s premier community
for families and businesses, striving for an even higher
quality of life and a bright future.”
This project was supported by funding from the Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham
(RPCGB) and the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Building Communities
Program.The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the
Birmingham MPO or the RPCGB. For more information on this program, please visit http://www.rpcgb.
org or call (205) 251-8139.
This plan was prepared as a cooperative effort of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT),
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Alabama Department
of Transportation (ALDOT), MPO and RPCGB as a requirement of Title 23 USC 134 and subsequent
modification under Public Law 109-59 (SAFETEA-LU) August 2005. The contents of the plan do not
necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the USDOT.
The contents of the Comprehensive Plan are designed to serve as a guide in the
public and private development of land and as such are not binding upon the City
of Alabaster when making specific land use decisions and public investments.
Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction & Travel in Alabaster Today.............................................................. 1
Introduction .....................................................................................................................................2
Accomplishments and Opportunities...............................................................................................4
Challenges.........................................................................................................................................5
Travel in Alabaster Today: System Inventory....................................................................................5
Chapter 2: Assessment of Current and Future Needs............................................................13
A Vision for Alabaster’s Transportation Future..............................................................................14
Transportation System Development Goal....................................................................................14
Identification of Needs...................................................................................................................14
Articulated Issues............................................................................................................................15
Roadway Segments of Concern......................................................................................................15
Other Observations........................................................................................................................19
Additional Considerations..............................................................................................................19
Planned/Programmed Projects......................................................................................................20
Chapter 3: Recommendations and Implementation.............................................................23
Introduction....................................................................................................................................24
Roadway Infrastructure and Operations Projects..........................................................................25
Access Management Plans.............................................................................................................28
Pedestrian Projects.........................................................................................................................30
Transit Projects...............................................................................................................................39
Freight Projects...............................................................................................................................46
Policy and Programmatic Recommendations................................................................................50
Transportation Infrastructure Maintenance..................................................................................52
Chapter 4: Potential Funding Sources...................................................................................55
Federal Funding Source..................................................................................................................56
State Funding Sources....................................................................................................................60
Local Funding sources....................................................................................................................61
Alabaster Forward: Appendix D Transportation Plan
iii
Figures
Figure 1.1:
Figure 1.2:
Figure 1.3:
Figure 2.1:
Functionally Classified Roadways................................................................................................3
Railroads and At-grade Railroad Crossings................................................................................10
Commute Shed Map..................................................................................................................11
Roadway Segments under Study...............................................................................................16
Figure 3.1: CR 11 (Simmsville Road) Proposed Roadway Section..................................................27
Figure 3.2: Proposed Roadways for Improvement......................................................................................29
Figure 3.3: Alabaster Trail Network.............................................................................................................31
Figure 3.4: Priority Roads for Sidewalk Development.................................................................................33
Figure 3.5: Priority Pedestrian Crossings ....................................................................................................35
Figure 3.6: On-street Bicycle Facilities Map.................................................................................................37
Figure 3.7: The City of Alabaster Composite Non-motorized Transportation Network Map.....................38
Figure 3.8: I-65 / U.S. 31 Mobility Matters project (Bus Rapid Transit Route E)............................40
Figure 3.9: Proposed Route and Stops for the Alabaster Local Shuttle/ Circulator Service.......................44
Figure 3.10: Freight Projects .......................................................................................................................48
All figures, tables, and images are produced by RPCGB, unless specifically noted.
iv
Tables
Table 2.1: Levels of Service for Study Roadways...........................................................................17
Table 2.2: Levels of Service for State Route 119...........................................................................18
Table 3.1: Proposed Roadway Improvement Projects .................................................................26
Table 3.2: Proposed Roadway Improvement Projects..................................................................28
Table 3.3: Alabaster Trail Network.................................................................................................30
Table 3.4: Alabaster Complete Streets Program, Sidewalk Development....................................32
Table 3.5: Alabaster Complete Streets Program, Priority Pedestrian Crossings...........................34
Table 3.6: Alabaster Complete Streets Program, On-street Bicycle Facilities . ............................36
Table 3.7: Transportation Recommendations, Propst Promenade Park and Ride Lot..................39
Table 3.8: Transportation Recommendations, Regional Express Bus Service...............................41
Table 3.9: Transportation Recommendations, Local Shuttle/Circulator Service..........................45
Table 3.10: Freight Projects, Designate Truck Routes...................................................................47
Table 3.11: Freight Projects, Physical Improvements to Freight...................................................49
Table 3.12: Policy and Programmatic Recommendations, Streetscape Program.........................50
Table 3.13: Policy and Programmatic Recommendations, Zoning and Development Review.....51
Table 3.14: Local Transportation Investment Program.................................................................52
All figures, tables, and images are produced by RPCGB, unless specifically noted.
v
vi
Alabaster Forward:
Alabaster
Forward:Appendix
AppendixDDTransportation
TransportationPlan
Plan
CHAPTER 1 A
Introduction & Travel
in Alabaster Today
1
Introduction and Travel in Alabaster Today
About the City of Alabaster
11th Avenue SW
Introduction
As the City of Alabaster embarks on its first-ever
citywide transportation plan, the challenges it
faces loom large. Concerns about congestion, evergrowing demands on revenue streams and economic
uncertainty exacerbated by fluctuating fuel prices
can seem insurmountable at times. The patterns
of investment, growth and development that have
sustained the City are showing their age. All signs
suggest that a new approach to transportation
investment is needed.
The Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan is
intended to address the City’s transportation
system, and was developed in the larger context
of the Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan’s
goals. Prior to this plan, the City of Alabaster did not
have a citywide transportation plan to guide policy
decisions. In developing a transportation plan for the
City of Alabaster, it is important first to understand
what issues the city faces and what opportunities
it has for moving forward. The recommendations
developed through this process represent significant
investments, and are a mechanism for civic
enhancement and economic growth.
2
The City of Alabaster is conveniently connected to
the greater Birmingham region. The city’s residents
rely primarily on private automobiles. Limited
public transit opportunities are available to elderly
citizens and individuals with disabilities via ClasTran.
Manufacturing and other industrial businesses utilize
the existing transportation infrastructure to move
their goods. The city’s major transportation network
includes two Class I railroads (that run along three
distinct corridors through the city), the I-65 interstate
corridor, U.S. 31, and several state routes and county
roads. Alabaster also has one major off-road nonmotorized travel facility, the Buck Creek Trail, one onroad bicycle facility, and several pockets of sidewalks
located in the historic downtown area and within
residential subdivisions. However, sidewalks are not
universally located in all residential communities.
Alabaster’s Transportation Role In
Regional Travel
The City of Alabaster’s geographic location in relation
to nationally- and regionally-significant transportation
arteries and facilities will likely assure that discussions
about countywide and regional transportation issues
will remain in the forefront of public policy well into
the future. Alabaster is traversed by an interstate and
inter-regional arteries that are crucial to the City’s
economic success, as well as the success of the State
of Alabama, the Greater Birmingham region and
Shelby County. These arteries include I-65 Interstate
and U.S. 31. Other regionally-significant roadways
include SR 119 and CR 11.
Similar to most of its suburban peers, the City of
Alabaster has limited travel choices beyond the
use of private autos for most travel needs. There is
currently no public transportation available for City
of Alabaster residents, although interest has been
expressed in establishing a transit connection to
employment centers in the City of Birmingham’s
Downtown and other employment centers. ClasTran
provides limited public transportation services for
elderly and disabled City residents. The demand for
services is growing now and will likely continue as
Shelby County’s and the City’s population grows.
Figure 1.1: Functionally Classified Roadways
Functional Classification
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
¤
£
31
Local Road
§
¦
¨
65
Alabaster City Limits
.
ad
Ro
e
i ll
.W
sv
ve
m
tA
44
m
1s
)
"
9th Street NW
Ind ustrial Rd.
Si
)
"
Thompson Road
264
)
"
17
¤
£
31
1s
«
¬
tS
119
Kent Dairy Road
tr
ee
tS
.
)
"
26
)
"
26
ler
d
Ro a
)
"
80
Ü
0
0.25
0.5
1
Miles
)
"
12
Sm ok ey R
o ad
Bu t
)
"
22
3
Accomplishments and
Opportunities
The City of Alabaster has come a long way since its
previous comprehensive plan was adopted in 2005.
It has established a record of success, particularly
as it relates to development of its transportation
infrastructure, on which it can build. Leveraging
these past successes is critical to maximizing
future opportunities. Previous and undergoing
accomplishments related to the development of the
transportation system include, but are not limited to:
CR 66 (Industrial Road) at U.S. 31 .
Interest in creating walkable and bicycle-friendly
communities is growing in Alabaster, and will
likely continue to be important as the City grows
and develops. As part of the Alabaster Forward
planning process, small area and corridor plans were
developed with the express intent of encouraging
mixed use, walkable/bikeable areas.
While portions of the City will likely remain rural or
very low density areas, other areas, especially those
near the Medical Mile and Siluria Mill areas, are
expected to redevelop with more dense and intense
urban uses. From a transportation perspective
over the next 20 years, the City of Alabaster’s
transportation system will likely evolve from a very
auto-oriented area to one providing more urban
transportation options. As both Shelby County and
the City of Alabaster expands in population and
employment, the City also will attract more trips,
as well as experience more through trips. These
trips will likely be commute trips from neighboring
communities such as Montevallo, Calera, and even
Chilton County whose residents are currently
commuting into Alabaster for both retail and medical
services, and through Alabaster for jobs across the
Greater Birmingham region. As these travel flows
increase, they will place increased impacts on the
City’s transportation systems. Additionally, expected
growth in both employment and retail services in
Alabaster will require that the City’s leadership begin
to pay greater attention to their role within the larger
regional transportation system.
4
SR 119 Widening. SR 119 is one of the City of
Alabaster’s main transportation corridors. In 2003,
this roadway was widened from two (2) lanes to (4)
lanes with a center turn median between 6th Avenue
SW and CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road). The additional
roadway capacity helped to alleviate congested
travel conditions and accommodate additional
residential and retail development that had located
to the corridor.
Buck Creek Trail. The Buck Creek Trail was developed
as an amenity for City residents, providing them with
access to the old Siluria Mill site and the natural
areas centered on Buck Creek. The trail connects
Buck Creek Park and Warrior Park, serving the
City of Alabaster City Hall and Senior Center, and
connecting the adjacent neighborhoods with the City
of Alabaster’s existing schools.
Above: The Buck Creek Trail serves as an amenity for City
residents providing them with access to the Old Siluria Mill site,
and the natural areas centered on Buck Creek.
CR 264 (Thompson Road). This project is currently
in the design phase and involves Alabaster working
with the Shelby County Highway Department and the
Alabama Department of Transportation to widen CR
264 (Thompson Road) from SR 119 to approximately
1,300 feet west of Warrior Drive. The project will add
a new westbound turn lane on Thompson Road from
Stadium Drive to Warrior Drive, will add a sidewalk
along Thompson Road from Warrior Drive to Stadium
Drive, will replace a bridge over Buck Creek and
will realign the intersection of Thompson Road and
Warrior Drive to allow drivers to travel straight from
Warrior Drive into a parking lot at Warrior Park. The
$700,000 project is expected to start construction in
Winter 2015 with a target completion date of Spring
2017.
Challenges
Funding. The City of Alabaster faces continual
challenges, of which is adequate funding for
transportation system improvements. Funding is
needed to support the maintenance and evolution of
the City’s existing transportation system. Inadequate
funding reduces the City’s ability to leverage state and
federal funding, and lessens the chances of securing
cooperative partnerships with Shelby County. As
no new and/or additional state and federal funding
is expected to become available in the foreseeable
future, there is a clear need for the City to investigate
alternative and/or innovative funding strategies,
especially if the City is to maintain its attractiveness
for young families and businesses.
Development Pattern. The City of Alabaster’s lowdensity and sprawling land development pattern
are not supportive of an efficient transportation
system. For the City, the lower development density
and underdeveloped roadways along with increased
retail and residential growth away from the City’s
historic downtown, retail, and employment centers
necessitates car ownership as a prerequisite to live,
work, shop, or play in Alabaster.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Environment. The
reemergence of in-town living typified by the
revitalization and redevelopment of downtowns and
town centers, coupled with the region’s transforming
demographics, portrayed by the emergence of
Millennials and retiring Baby Boomers as a combined
economic force, has led to a shift in historic
development patterns and consumer preferences.
Among these shifts is a desire to improve the bicycle
and pedestrian environment. In general, the City
of Alabaster’s bicycle and pedestrian environment
does not provide equitable coverage of these types
of infrastructure throughout the city. Existing facilities
for aging and disabled persons are not adequate to
allow for their mobility.
Transportation System Improvement Imbalances.
As described previously, the City of Alabaster’s low
density development pattern has resulted in an
inefficient transportation system. The resulting
sprawled development pattern, by its nature, has had
to focus on longer distance travel, and thus the City’s
roadways are engineered for vehicle mobility. Because
of this focus, Alabaster’s primary roadways, such as
SR 119 and U.S. 31, historically have been the focus of
capital improvement efforts. Improvements to local
streets, to include non-motorized improvements, are
largely non-existent.
Travel in Alabaster Today:
System Inventory
U.S. 31 North near Browing Circle.
Roadways. Roadways vary not only in width,
design, cross-section, and traffic volume, but also
in their function. Roads are classified by the federal
government (U.S. Department of Transportation)
and State Departments of Transportation (DOTs)
according to the transportation function they provide
to the community. The functional classification of a
5
road describes the character of service the road is
intended to provide. The various road classifications
primarily serve two competing functions: access
to property and travel mobility depending upon
their purpose. The City of Alabaster has a total of
approximately 197 miles of roadways grouped into
four distinct roadway classifications: local roadways,
collector roads, minor arterials and major arterials.
These are shown in Figure 1.1.
Principal Arterials. Principal Arterials are major
roadways primarily serving “through traffic,” conveying
traffic to and from expressways and freeways, and
having minimum direct service to abutting land. In
some cases, principal arterial roadways provide direct
access to adjacent properties. However, this can be
problematic for traffic movement. Principal arterial
roadways serving the City of Alabaster, totaling
approximately 11.2 miles, include:
• U.S. 31
• SR 119
Minor Arterials. Minor Arterials provide for
movement within larger subareas that are bound by
principal arterials. A minor arterial also may serve
“through traffic,” but provides more direct access
to abutting land uses than does a principal arterial.
Minor arterial roadways serving the City of Alabaster,
totaling approximately 4.1 miles, include:
• CR 17
• CR 26 (east of I-65)
have mixed uses abutting. Major collectors within the
City of Alabaster include:
• CR 11 (Simmsville Road)
• CR 12 (Butler Road/Smokey Road)
• CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road)
• CR 44 (1st Avenue)
• CR 66 (Industrial Road)
• CR 68
• CR 87
• CR 95 (9th Street NW)
• CR 264 (Thompson Road)
• Kent Dairy Road
Minor Collectors are public roadways that accumulate
traffic from local streets for distribution into arterials
(major or minor) or major collector roadways. A minor
collector typically has residential uses. However, it
may also serve commercial or mixed uses. CR 80
(Mission Hills Road) within the City of Alabaster is a
minor collector.
Local Streets. Local Streets are intended to provide
little to no through traffic. They provide access to
individual single-family residential lots, entry and exit
to the neighborhood, and connectivity to collectors
and thoroughfares. In short, all other roadways not
previously listed are considered local streets. Eightytwo percent of all the roads in Alabaster are local
streets, totaling approximately 162 miles.
Collectors. Collectors are roadways that serve often
definable neighborhoods, which may be bound
by arterials with higher classifications. As their
name suggests, collector streets ideally “collect and
distribute” local traffic, providing a link between local
neighborhood streets (i.e. non-arterials) and larger
arterials. A Collector Street may be a Major Collector
or a Minor Collector. The City of Alabaster is served
by approximately 20.05 miles of collectors. Collectors
serve very little “through traffic”. They do, however,
serve a high proportion of local traffic requiring direct
access to abutting properties.
Major Collectors are public roadways that accumulate
traffic from local streets and Minor Collectors for
distribution to arterial (major or minor) roadways. A
Major Collector may have commercial, residential or
6
CR 66 (Industrial Road) is a major collector in the City of
Alabaster.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
Bicycle Facilities. The City of Alabaster’s current
leadership has expressed its commitment to improving
its bicycle facilities. City of Alabaster residents have
consistently shown their interest in a well-developed
bicycle network, and have expressed their desire to
incorporate bicycle travel as part of the City’s overall
transportation infrastructure, ensuring that cycling
becomes a viable travel alternative. Despite this
interest, the City only has approximately 1.5 miles
of total directional on-street bicycle facilities. This
consists of a marked bicycle lane (width: >4 feet) along
Weatherly Club Drive between Glen Abbey Lane and
Wembley Way/Belvedere Place. Weatherly Club Drive
is located just off of CR 11 (Simmsville Road) running
along the eastern boundary of the city beginning in
the northeastern corner.
Pedestrian Facilities. Sidewalks provide a solid
pedestrian foundation. There are some roadway
segments that have sidewalks on one or both sides of
the roadway. However, the majority of the roadways
within the City of Alabaster have no sidewalks at all.
The city policies prioritize the need for sidewalks and
require that new residential development include
sidewalks as part of the overall infrastructure package.
ExisitngWaverly bike lane located along Weatherly Club Drive in
Alabaster, Alabama.
In addition to sidewalks, the City of Alabaster also
maintains approximately one (1) mile of gravel trail
along the Buck Creek. Buck Creek Trail parallels the
Buck Creek and SR 119 corridor as it passes through
Siluria Mill. The trail connects Buck Creek Park and
Warrior Park, linking the City of Alabaster’s Thompson
Elementary and Intermediate schools, civic buildings
(including the City of Alabaster Personnel Office, the
Alabaster Senior Center, and the Alabaster City Hall),
and the Siluria Mill neighborhood along the way. The
City has plans to extend the Buck Creek Trail south
approximately 2.5 miles to Veterans Park. The
extended trail is planned to follow an existing sewer
easement.
Public Transportation
ClasTran is a regional transporation provider that is multimodal, flexible, and afforadable for alabama residents.
(Source:http://wbrc.images.worldnow.com/images/19917312_)
ClasTran is a regional transportation provider
comprised of a consortium of county and local
governments, and human service agencies.
ClasTran primarily provides para-transit services
for elderly and qualified disabled individuals who
are participating in one of consortium member’s
programs and for persons living in three (Jefferson,
Shelby and Walker) of the six counties that make
up the Greater Birmingham region, provided that
these individuals live outside of the Birmingham
Jefferson County’s fixed-route transit service
boundaries. They also provide public transportation
services i.e. services that are open to anyone
residing in the rural areas of these three counties.
According to ClasTran records, the service provides an
average of 25 trips/day to City of Alabaster residents.
Approximately 430 riders/day have either trip origins
or destinations within the City of Alabaster. ClasTran
reports that City of Alabaster residents’ trip purposes
include trips to medical services, shopping, social
7
services and other activities. Trips made by Alabaster
residents are made within the City of Alabaster,
throughout Shelby County and across the Greater
Birmingham region. ClasTran also provides access
to the Alabaster Senior Center, bringing Shelby
County’s senior residents (age 60+) who are actively
participating in the Middle Alabama Area Agency on
Aging (M4A) Senior Services program. The fare for
riders using ClasTran is $4/one-way trip.
In addition to ClasTran, Chilton County Public
Transportation also provides demand responsive bus
transit service to the Shelby Baptist Medical Center
and the ancillary medical facilities and providers near
the hospital. According to Chilton County Public
Transportation’s records, 22 total trips were made to
Shelby Baptist Medical Center in 2014. This equates
to an average of 1.8 trips/month and an average of
2.4 riders per trip. The round trip fare for riders from
anyplace in Chilton County to Shelby Baptist Medical
Center is $20.
Railroads and Air Transportation
"Personal automobiles are the most common form of
transportation in the CIty of Alabaster. .."
While personal automobiles are the most common
form of transportation, rail and air travel remain
critical to the efficient movement of people and goods.
More importantly, these facilities require specialized
planning and development to ensure efficient
operation and not adversely impact surrounding land
uses.
Railroads. Railroad service has declined in priority in
the United States since the 1950‘s, but is still crucial
to several industries. Heavy rail is an integral part of
8
modern industrial freight movement. Transportation
planning must address available rail options and
conditions not only for the benefit of the rail system,
but also for points where rail service interacts (or
intersects) other transportation systems.
CSX Railway adjacent to U.S. 31 North.
Two (2) Class I rail facilities comprising three (3) active
freight lines run in a north-south direction through
the City of Alabaster. CSX operates two (2) major
rail lines through the City of Alabaster, connecting
the City of Mobile in South Alabama with the City of
Chicago in the Great Lakes region. Norfolk Southern
operates a single line through the western area of the
city. These rail lines connect with intermodal facilities
in Birmingham, and serve several of Alabaster’s and
Shelby County’s quarries. While the City’s leaders and
residents recognize the utility of these facilities, they
also are desirous of finding some way to mitigate the
impact of these rail lines on residential communities
and local traffic. Both the CSX and Norfolk Southern
rail lines cross major roadways at grade. The two
eastern most rail lines that run through the City are
owned by CSX, one of which mostly parallels U.S. 31.
The rail line is so close to U.S. 31 that the signal timing
at the intersection of U.S. 31 and CR 11/SR 119 is
coordinated with the rail crossing gate’s signals. The
fast moving trains present a problem for commuters
during both the morning and afternoon peak travel
hours in that trains often run during these travel
periods. Although they are moving at a reasonable
speed, the typical duration of a rail movement across
the at-grade intersection is about 300 seconds (five
minutes). This exacerbates the already long traffic
delays, causing vehicles queues to exceed the turn bay
storage capacity of the parallel roadway, and adding
further to signal cycle failures. Figure 1.2 illustrates
the CSX and Norfolk Southern rail corridors as they
run through the City of Alabaster, and highlights the
at-grade railroad crossings.
Airport. The City of Alabaster is served by the Shelby
County General Aviation Airport. It is a public use
general aviation facility located to the south of
Alabaster, in the neighboring City of Calera. A portion
of the airport’s runway is located within the City of
Alabaster’s municipal boundaries. The Shelby County
Airport is near the Shelby West Industrial Park and
adjacent to I-65. The airport’s single runway parallels
I-65 as well. It is accessible from the interstate at Exit
234 and CR 87. It also is accessible from CR 12. The
airport is owned and managed by the Shelby County
Commission.
Shelby County Airport. (Source: http://
e1.photos.flightcdn.com/photos/retriever/
fabe39e67e65245d5ad8eeb122748e0fa2cf0194)
The Shelby County airport provides private general
aviation air service including fuel sales and aircraft
storage, and also harbors a local flight school. The
airport features a single, asphalt paved runway at
5,000 x 75 feet. The runway is weight limited at 16,000
pounds. For the reporting period ending January 22,
2015, the Shelby County Commission indicated that
there were1:
1
. www.airnav.com
• 79 - Total airplanes based on the field
◦◦ 72 – Single engine airplane
◦◦ 6 – Multi-engine airplanes
◦◦ 1 – Jet airplane
• 57 – Daily aircraft operations (average), of
which:
◦◦ 70% (39.9) – Classified as transient general
aviation
◦◦ 29% (16.5) – Classified as local general
aviation
◦◦ 1% (0.57) – Classified as military
Travel Patterns
Land use and development patterns have had impacts
on Alabaster. With an estimated 23% of employed
residents of Alabaster working in Alabaster, 77% of
Alabaster workers commute elsewhere to their jobs.
A commute shed analysis of Alabaster (as shown in
Figure 1.3) shows that residents travel throughout
the Birmingham metropolitan planning area to reach
their jobs. Primary commuting destinations include
Birmingham (23%), Hoover (16%), Pelham (12%),
and Homewood (6%). A more detailed analysis of
the workplace destinations of Alabaster commuters
includes the Birmingham City Center and Southside
areas (UAB), the Riverchase Parkway, Bell South and
Southgate Village areas of Hoover, and the Cahaba
Valley Business Park, Commerce Boulevard, and Oak
Mountain Marketplace areas of Pelham.
The Propst Promenade is a primary destination for both
residents and those traveling to Alabaster
(Source :Neal Wagner).
9
Figure 1.2: Railroads and At-grade Railroad Crossings
"
)
52
"
)
33
¬
«
261
$
+
At- Grade Railroad Crossings
Railroad by Owner
CSX
"
)
52E
£
¤
31
"
)
58
Norfolk Southern
§
¦
¨
"
)
65
11
$
+
"
)
68
Industrial Rd.
"
)
264
$
+
Thompson Road
"
)
17
Ro
ad
ill
e
+
$
+$
sv
.W
.
m
Av
e
Si
m
44
9th Street NW
1s
t
"
)
$
+
$
+
$
+
31
£
¤
$
+
$
+
1s
t
¬
«
119
"
)
270
St
re
$
+
Kent Dairy Road
"
)
et
$
+
26
S.
§
¦
¨
65
"
)
)"
26 26
"
)
17
But
R
ler
oad
$
+
12
¬
«
119
"
)
$
+
"
)
80
£
¤
31
Smokey R
oad
$
+
"
)
87
"
)
24
¬
«
70
Ü
10
0
0.25 0.5
"
)
22
1
Miles
"
)
16
"
)
22
Figure 1.3: Commute Shed Map
H
!
Concentrations of employment locations of
Alabaster residents
H
!
H
!
Graysville
West Jefferson
H
!
H
!
less
H
!
Cardiff
H
!
H
!
Center Point
H
!
§
¨
¦ !H
65
H
!
H
!
H
!
Pleasant Grove
H
!
Fairfield
Midfield
H
!
H
!
§
¨
¦ Brighton
20
H
!
H
!
North Johns
H
!
20
Birmingham
H
!
Hueytown
H
!
H
!
H
!
§
¨
¦
59
Trussville
H
!
H
!
§
¨
¦
H
!
Sylvan Springs
Argo
Tarrant
Maytown Mulga
H
!
Clay
Fultondale
JEFFERSON
H
!
H
!
Gardendale
Brookside
more
Adamsville
Pinson
Homewood
§
¨
¦ Leeds
20
Irondale
H
!
Mountain Brook
§
¨
¦
Vestavia Hills
459
§
¨
¦
65
H
!
Lipscomb
This page is intentionally left blank.
H
!
Bessemer
H
!
Hoover
Westover
H
!
H
!
Indian Springs Village
§
¨
¦
459
H
!
H
!
Pelham
H
!
Chelsea
Helena
SHELBY
H
!
Alabaster
§
¨
¦
65
H
!
H
!
Montevallo
H
!
H
!
Columbiana
Calera
Wilton
Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
user community
11
12
Alabaster Forward:
Alabaster
Forward:Appendix
TransportationPlan
Plan
CHAPTER 2 A
Assessment of Current
and Future Needs
13
Assessment of Current and Future Needs
A Vision for Alabaster’s
Transportation Future
Transportation System
Development Goal
The City of Alabaster’s vision for growth and
development emphasizes the City’s role in Shelby
County’s population and business expansion, and its
desire to provide a high quality of life for its residents
now, and into the future. Transportation plays a key
function in helping the City to achieve this vision.
Alabaster’s transportation network, as described
in the Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan, is
envisioned to be a part of an interconnected system
that offers a range of safe, affordable, efficient, and
convenient travel choices for residents, employees
and visitors alike.
The Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan contains
a number of goals and policies to inform and guide
the City of Alabaster in their implementation of the
plan’s recommendations. One of these is the goal
for transportation. Goal 5 of the Alabaster Forward
Comprehensive Plan expresses the City’s aspiration
to be “well connected…” The City’s goal explicitly
declares that it will “Develop and maintain strong
multi-modal connections,” and will accomplish
the goal by “investing in the development of a safe
pedestrian and bicycle network, including sidewalks,
crosswalks, bicycle lanes, and multi-use trails that
provide connections between the city’s neighborhood
centers.”
In addition to the transportation goal, the other Alabaster
Forward goals also speak to:
• Creating a greater sense of community identity
and place
• Supporting a thriving business environment
• Improving land use and urban design
• Promoting a healthy and safe living environment
• Providing quality government service through
partnership and cooperation.
"Alabaster Forward envisions the City of Alabaster an an
interconnected systems that offers a range of...travel choices.."
Discussions with City leaders and residents revealed
their desire to develop multi-modal corridors
and centers that maximize both the capacity and
efficiency of existing transportation infrastructure,
and employing strategies to eliminate and/or
minimize congestion. There also is a desire to ensure
that city streets are attractive and, in addition to their
transportation aspects, function as public spaces.
Finally, one of the expressed desires for Alabaster’s
transportation system is to create a balanced
transportation network; one that accommodates the
predominant travel mode – the automobile, while
reorienting travel between and within the City’s
communities and neighborhood centers towards
pedestrians and bicycles using a series of trails and
paths to provide access.
14
This transportation plan speaks to each of these,
and the recommendations contained herein provide
a demonstration of how the transportation plan can
help the City of Alabaster to achieve these goals. These
are reflected as capital projects and programmatic
actions that the City might undertake in the nearterm as well as in the long-term.
Identification of Needs
To define the recommended improvements, the
Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan conducted
a process that combined technical analysis,
community input and inter-agency coordination. The
transportation planning process consists of three
major steps: identification of needs, program and
project recommendations, and a funding analysis.
Each of these steps is described below, and in more
detail in subsequent sections.
Roadway Segments of
Concern
Throughout the planning process, the public was asked to voice
their transportation concerns through Community Remarks on
the Alabaster Forward website.
Articulated Issues
A number of transportation concerns were identified
by the City of Alabaster’s leaders and residents
alike. These concerns reflected frustration with the
increasingly congested conditions of SR 119. Concerns
also were expressed about the delays caused by train
traffic at the intersection of U.S. 31 and SR 119, as
well as a crossing at SR 119 between 13th and 14th
Avenues SW, just north of the Thompson 6th Grade
Center.
In addition to these concerns, residents, businesses,
and community leaders also expressed concern about
congestion at the interchange of I-65 and U.S. 31, and
the segment of roadway I-65 and Propst Promenade
Parkway. Concerns also were expressed about the
provision of public transportation services for both
commuters to/from the City of Alabaster, and seniors
seeking to gain access to the Shelby Baptist Medical
Center and its affiliated medical uses located in the
Medical Mile Corridor. Finally, residents and city
leaders expressed a desire to expand and improve
the existing Buck Creek Trail to Veteran Park. The
existing Buck Creek Trail currently runs between Buck
Creek Park and Warrior Park through the Siluria Mill
community.
An identification of needs based on an assessment of
the existing system’s performance is the first step of
the transportation planning process. Both short- and
long-term needs over the planning timeframe were
established for traffic congestion and roadway safety
are key concerns for the City of Alabaster. To address
these concerns, metrics that accurately quantify the
issues are required. Typically, traffic studies use an
automobile Level of Service (LOS) methodology to
describe traffic conditions and assess impacts. But
this approach tells only part of the story. To present
a balanced view of current traffic conditions for all
roadway users in Alabaster, this report uses a range
of metrics to document existing conditions, including
intersection LOS, roadway segment volumes and
roadway segment volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio.
The roadway segments included in this study for
further evaluation are identified below, and are
highlighted in Figure 2.1 Traffic counts on the
roadway segments were assembled from the
Alabama Department of Transportation traffic count
website and the RPCGB traffic count database. Data
assembled from these sources used the latest year
available. A number of facilities were also counted
using automatic traffic recorders (i.e. tube counts).
These were collected over a 48-hour period on a
typical weekday.
• CR 12 (Butler Road/Smokey Road)
• CR 17 (North of CR 44/1st Avenue West)
• CR 44 (1st Avenue)
• CR 68
• CR 87
• CR 95 (9th Street NW)
• CR 264 (Thompson Road)
• Kent Dairy Road
15
Figure 2.1: Roadway Segments under Study
"
)
52
Roadway Segments under Study
"
)
33
¬
«
261
"
)
52E
£
¤
31
"
)
58
"
)
95
68
Ro
ad
ill
e
sv
"
)
Thompson Road
264
"
)
17
11
m
.W
.
"
)
Si
m
Av
e
9th Street NW
1s
t
44
65
"
)
Industrial Rd.
"
)
§
¦
¨
£
¤
31
1s
t
¬
«
119
"
)
270
Kent Dairy Road
"
)
26
St
re
et
S.
§
¦
¨
65
"
)
)"
26 26
"
)
17
Ro a
d
"
)
¬
«
119
"
)
£
¤
12
31
Smokey R
oad
ler
But
80
"
)
87
"
)
24
¬
«
70
Ü
16
0
0.25 0.5
"
)
22
1
Miles
"
)
16
"
)
22
Findings
Generalized Level of Service Analysis. The City of
Alabaster’s existing transportation conditions were
evaluated considering both roadway users’ quality/
level of service (Q/LOS) and generalized roadway
capacity. Quality of service is a traveler-based
perception of how well a transportation service or
facility operates.2 In traffic analysis, delay is a measure
of quality of service to the road user. This quality
of service is usually expressed as level of service
(LOS). LOS is a quantitative stratification of quality
of service into six letter grades, “A” to “F”, with “A”
representing the best conditions and “F” representing
the worst conditions. LOS provides a generalized
planning measure of operating conditions that is
experienced by motorists as they travel inside the
roadway environment (essentially inside the right-ofway). In short, LOS is simply a quantitative breakdown
of transportation quality of service (satisfaction) as
measured by the transportation users’ perspectives.
It should be noted that the capacity analysis conducted
for the City of Alabaster is specific to interrupted flow
facilities. That is, travel facilities that have fixed causes
of periodic delay or interruption to the traffic stream.
This includes traffic control devices such as stop signs
and traffic signals, as well as frequent access points
hour, passenger cars per hour, or vehicles per hour
depending on the type of analysis or system element.
The levels of service for the study roadways are
presented in Table 2.1 They are provided for
contextual purposes. Note: Average Annual Daily
Traffic (AADT) volumes were not available for CR 26
(Fulton Springs Road). As such, no LOS assessment
was conducted along this road segment. Also note
that the adjusted AADT was utilized in this analysis
for data collected specifically for this project.
These adjusted AADT were derived using ALDOT’s
adjustment factors and applied to the ATR collected
data.
2 Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Systems Planning Office.
Florida Department of Transportation. 2013
Table 2.1: Levels of Service for Study Roadways
Road/Street Name
CR 11 (Simmsville Road)
County Road 12 (Butler Road / Smokey Road)
County Road 17
County Road 44 (1st Avenue W)
County Road 66 (Industrial Road)
County Road 68
County Road 87
County Road 95 (9th Street NW)
County Road 264 (Thompson Road)
Kent Dairy Road
AADT
Volume
6,948 a
4,258 a
8,547 a
7,266 a
15,040 a
5,211 b
4,998 c
8,643 c
8,016 b
10,004 a
LOS
D
C
D
D
F
C
C
D
D
D
FDOT Q/LOS Manual Cover
A. RPCGB 2010 Traffic Counts
B. RPCGB 2013 Traffic Counts
C. 2014 Adjusted Average ATR collected data
17
In addition to the previously listed facilities, a
generalized assessment of SR 119 was conducted
using the same methodology described above. SR
119 was identified by elected officials and residents
alike as being problematic in that there is a perception
of congested conditions, specifically between
CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road) and CR 80 (Mission
Hills Road). The City of Alabaster has secured $10
million in funding through the Alabama Department
of
Transportation’s
Alabama
Transportation
Rehabilitation and Improvement Program (ATRIP),
and has plans to widen the current two-lane section
to five-lanes (four travel lanes plus a two-left turn
lane). A more detailed description of this project is
provided later in this section. It should be noted that
traffic signals were added in 2014 at the intersection
of SR 119 and CR 80 (Mission Hills Road) to help
alleviate frequent congestion at the intersection,
particularly for residents living in the Wynlake and
other subdivisions off CR 80.
The levels of service for the SR 119 are presented
in Table 2.1. These LOS are provided for contextual
purposes and are intended to document the
roadway’s existing conditions. They are not intended
to justify any improvement projects
Table 2.2: Levels of Service for State Route 119
Roadway Segment
From
Kent Dairy Road
CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road)
Dale Drive
18
AADT
Volume
To
CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road)
Dale Drive
CR 80 (Mission Hills Road)
22,679
21,330
14,506
LOS
F
F
D
Other Observations
and can create greater efficiency in the provision and
use of public infrastructure and services.
Transportation and Land Use Connection. The
City of Alabaster has a typical suburban pattern
of development. The vast majority of the city is
developed in a pattern of relative low density. Though
the general pattern of development is low density,
development density tends to be focused around
major roads. The higher the traffic volume on the road,
typically the more dense the development along that
road. Correspondingly, as traffic volume decreases, so
also does the development along the road.
Major influences on the current traffic patterns
include the continued growth and urbanization of the
Birmingham metropolitan area’s rural communities,
particularly those communities located to the south
and east of Alabaster; the growing influence of job
centers located in Hoover and the U.S. 280 corridor,
and; the city‘s own economic activity centers:
Industrial sites, the hospital, commercial centers,
parks and recreational facilities, etc.
In general, individual developments in the
City of Alabaster are often not connected to
adjacent developments by either pedestrian or
roadway connections. Thus to access virtually all
developments, an automobile trip or a relatively long
and often dangerous pedestrian trip must be made.
Furthermore, the trip must exit one development
onto a collector or arterial street and then enter
another development even though the developments
are adjacent. This is almost always the case with
adjacent residential developments and is usually
the case with adjacent commercial developments.
Where residential and commercial developments are
adjacent, there is also typically no connection. This
pattern of development has led to the need for an
automobile in order to perform even the most basic
every day functions.
Additional Considerations
The City of Alabaster’s transportation system is largely
defined by topography. The area’s topography has
helped to shape the City’s roads, and the slope of the
land dictates both buildable land and the route for
optimal roadways. The area’s topography has largely
limited the City’s growth to a valley. As a result these
roadways have grown in their role as arterial highways
and helped shaped land use along their corridors.
Planned and Programmed Projects. The City of
Alabaster’s Transportation Plan does not replace
projects that have already been identified through
the metropolitan transportation planning process,
but rather builds on the background established by
it. It also builds upon previous plans and corridor
planning studies, along with the small area planning
that was conducted as part of the Alabaster Forward
Comprehensive Plan’s development process. This
planning work produced a basic set of communitybased program and project concepts.
As noted in both the Existing Conditions Report’s
(Appendix A) commuting profile and Chapter 1 of
this document, the majority of Alabaster residents
commute to work outside of Alabaster.
The
separation of jobs and housing increases strain to
worker finances, adds congestion to area roadways
and contributes to air quality issues. Better planned
development policies can help to reduce travel times,
can reduce the amount of land developed overall to
meet the needs of existing and growing populations,
In addition to the information about the transportation
system presented in the preceding, transportation
needs were informed by various data and analysis,
as well as stakeholder input. The basic data collected
during the inventory phase of the project provided
much of the foundation for analyses. However, public
outreach and stakeholder involvement was the most
significant driver in identifying needs. This input
helped to shape the transportation vision expressed
within this document, as well as the transportation
goal and the associated policies that are articulated
in the Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan
document. Beyond those elements, the following
are a number of other resources and tools that were
gathered and utilized:
Coordination with Public Agencies. The City of
Alabaster continues to work in partnership with
Shelby County, regional, and state agencies to create
a plan that forwards the City’s interests, while creating
opportunities for the County and the region.
19
Field Observation. In many cases, the Regional
Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham’s
Alabaster Forward project team, City of Alabaster
staff, and members of the Alabaster community have
observed areas that need improvements and/or
repair but do not show up in standard data analysis.
the cities of Alabaster and Montevallo. According to
the TIP, the project has a total project cost of just over
$11.2 million, with $175k used for the initial corridor
study, $250k going towards preliminary engineering,
$532k going towards right-of-way acquisition, and
$10.3 million going towards construction.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Spatial
Analysis. GIS and spatial analysis are a key tools for
measuring the physical scale and relationships for
both current conditions and proposed changes.
The first of the two Shelby County sponsored projects
in the City of Alabaster is the widening and resurfacing
of CR 11 (Simmsville Road) between U.S. 31 and
Weatherly Club Road. CR 11 is proposed to be widened
from two (2) lanes to three (3) lanes. Preliminary
engineering work and right-of-way acquisition are
slated to begin in federal fiscal years (FY) 2020 and
2021 respectively. Construction is slated to begin in
FY 2022, and the widening completed and open to
traffic by FY 2024. When completed, the anticipated
total project cost is about $10.7 million of which 80%
(approximately $8.6 million) would come from federal
sources, and the remaining 20% (approximately $2.1
million) coming from local sources (either the County,
the City, or both). Note: project cost is in year of
expenditure dollars.
Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan. The
concurrent update to the City of Alabaster’s
Comprehensive Plan, Alabaster Forward, provided
guidance for the development of the transportation
plan.
Planned/Programmed
Projects
At present, the City of Alabaster has one major
transportation project with programmed funding in
the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization’s
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and
three additional projects identified in the Birmingham
Metropolitan Planning Organization’s 2040 Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP 2040). The City of Alabaster
is the sponsor of the TIP project; Shelby County is the
sponsor of two of the RTP 2040 projects. The Alabama
Department of Transportation is the project sponsor
of the third RTP 2040 project, a bridge widening
on Interstate 65 south of U.S. 31. Note: the City of
Alabaster’s TIP project is also listed in RTP 2040, and
is technically a RTP 2040 project as well.
The City of Alabaster sponsored project is looking to
add additional lanes on SR 119 between CR 26 (Fulton
Springs Road) and CR 80 (Mission Hills Road). SR 119
is currently two-lanes. Plans call for widening the
roadway to five (5) lanes, allowing for four (4) travel
lanes with a two-way left turn lane. This segment of
SR 119 would connect with an existing five (5) lane
segment north of the study location, and will address
an existing bottle neck where the 5 lane section
narrows to two lanes just north of CR 26 (Fulton
Springs Road). The additional capacity also will
address the ever increasing congestion along SR 119
resulting from additional residential development in
20
The second Shelby County sponsored project is the
widening of Kent Dairy Road from CR 17 to Kentwood
Drive. Kent Dairy Road is currently two-lanes; the
proposed project would widen it to three-lanes.
The estimated total cost of this project in year of
expenditure dollars is $3 million, and is expected to
be opened to traffic by FY 2024.
Two more lanes to be added to SR119, from CR 26 to CR 80
(Source: Alan Collins/WBRC)
This page is intentionally left blank.
21
22
Alabaster Forward:
Alabaster
Forward:Appendix
TransportationPlan
Plan
CHAPTER 3 A
Recommendations
and Implementation
23
Recommendations and Implementation
Introduction
Creating a place for people means building an
urban fabric and overall environment that provides
comfortable, rewarding experiences for individuals
who live, work, visit, and travel through an area. This
approach to place-making stands in stark contrast to
areas that are designed to maximize traffic throughput
and minimize urban design, thereby failing to create
places that can be easily enjoyed.
Alabaster
Forward
envisions
creating
an
interconnected community that is comfortable, well
designed, and facilitates an array of transportation
options. Residents and visitors alike will have the
ability to freely choose how they will travel, and
whether they are walking, biking, driving, or using
public transportation, they will be able to enjoy the
City of Alabaster.
There is no doubt that this transportation plan
emphasizes non-motorized travel. However, to
solely focus on bicycles, pedestrians, and public
transportation would be negligent as travel by
automobile is still important. As such, the Alabaster
Forward Transportation Plan has taken a multi-modal
approach to assessing the transportation system.
This has resulted in a list of recommended projects,
each tailored to fit the comments and input received
during this study process, but grounded by technical
analysis.
If implemented, these projects will have a major
improvement on the quality of life for all travelers.
Many residents, agencies, businesses, organizations
and leaders have helped create and validate the
Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan. Their
continued commitment will be needed to implement
the strategies and recommendations outlined in this
plan in order to achieve the city’s transportation
vision.
• The City Manager is responsible for guiding
policy decisions, informing and directing staff
to projects, seeking funding and maintaining
project plans.
• The Public Works Department is accountable
for building and maintaining infrastructure,
implementing adopted plans, and helping to
generate new ideas.
• The Planning and Zoning Commission is
pledged with developing and maintaining the
vision, developing, executing, and maintaining
the regulatory environment, and providing
guidance.
• The Shelby County Department of
Development Services is responsible for
planning, land development, building, fire
safety, and permit coordination services for the
citizens of Shelby County.
•
The Shelby County Highway Department is
responsible for the design, construction, and
maintenance of county road projects.
Street Paving.
The following identifies the individuals, agencies,
and departments who need to lead implementation
efforts, and what their roles are:
• The Mayor and City Council are charged with
establishing policy direction and allocating
funding.
24
Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan
Roadway Infrastructure and
Operations Projects
Roadway widening is generally a solution of last
resort in the battle against congestion. This is
reflected in the region’s adopted congestion
management process. Recommendations to add
capacity are not provided lightly, especially in
light of the City of Alabaster’s expressed goal to
improve travel for non-motorized users. However,
roadway widening can be accomplished in a manner
that improves travel conditions for all users and
therefore improves the overall quality of life for
its residents. Alabaster, however, is still a growing
suburban city, and its roadway network needs to
grow and change as well.
Kent Dairy Road near Kentwood Way
Roadways in Alabama are narrow and wind through
terrain following natural features like streams and
ridgelines. Roadways also follow historic Native
American travel paths, stage coach routes, rail
corridors, and old mining and logging trails. As
these travel paths have evolved into the City’s
current roadways, they have not always been
inclusive of modern standards. That is, roadways
may not provide shoulders or adequate lane
widths, address water drainage, or accommodate
non-motorized travelers. These deficiencies pose a
threat to traveler safety.
The Shelby County Department of Transportation
has indicated that it’s ideal roadway configuration
includes twelve (12) foot travel lanes, two (2) foot
paved shoulders, and as much additional shoulder
as possible beyond that, especially in areas that
have low development densities, are rural in
character, or that are undeveloped. Across Shelby
County, and in the City of Alabaster, some roads
have the terrain and right-of-way that allow for
additional lane width and the addition of paved
shoulders. However, most roadways do not meet
these conditions, and in order to achieve the
desired configuration additional right-of-way would
need to be acquired and significant work required to
relocate utilities.
SR 119 near Fulton Springs Road.
CR 11 near CR 58
Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan
25
Shelby County’s need to improve roadways to
address traveler safety, and the City’s desire to
include non-motorized travel facilities so that the
City’s roads and streets are more pleasing and safe
for bicycle and pedestrian travel may seem to be
at odds and cost is certainly a consideration. None
the less, both can be accomplished and a balanced
transportation network achieved. The Alabaster
Forward Transportation Plan recommends that
future roadway expansions take into consideration
the inclusion of on-street bicycle facilities (where
feasible) in accordance with this the transportation
plan’s recommendations and consideration of
the existing and planned/expected development
context. Additionally, it is recommended that
existing and future roadways include five (5) foot
planting/furniture zone, and a minimum six (6)
foot sidewalk. Inclusion of these facilities should be
done so in accordance with the Alabaster Forward
Transportation Plan’s recommendations, and both
the existing development context and planned
future development character.
As described in Chapter 2 of this document,
the following transportation projects are either
programmed (included in the metropolitan planning
organization’s Transportation Improvement Program)
or planned (included in the MPO’s Regional
Transportation Plan):
• SR 119. Additional lanes (from 2 to five lanes)
between CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road) and CR
80 (Mission Hills Road).
• CR 11 (Simmsville Road). Additional lanes
(from 2 to 3 lanes) and resurfacing between
U.S. 31 and Weatherly Club Road
• Kent Dairy Road. Additional lanes (from 2 to
3 lanes) and resurfacing between CR 17 and
Kentwood Drive
Table 3.1 lists roadway improvement
recommendations which are shown in Figure 3.2.
It is recommended that the City seek Advanced
Planning Programming and Logical Engineering
(APPLE) funding through the Regional Planning
Commission of Greater Birmingham for these
projects in advance of any preliminary engineering
work (see Chapter 4, Potential Funding Sources, for
additional information).
Table 3.1: Proposed Roadway Improvement Projects
Roadway Improvements
Project Purpose: To provide additional roadway capacity and improve traveler safety by modernizing area
roadways and accommodating non-motorized users.
Project
Roadway improvements, as described herein, consist of three distinctive components.
Description:
They are:
• Roadway capacity expansions: consists of providing additional roadway capacity to
accommodate increased traffic volume and facilitate left-turning movements.
• Roadway safety improvements: consists of providing additional shoulder width,
improving sight lines, guard rails, etc.
Time Frame:
Potential
Funding:
Lead Agency:
26
• Non-motorized travel facilities (see Complete Streets Program below)
0-15 years
• Local Funding
• Surface Transportation Program (STP)
For additional information about project eligibility and other potential funding, contact
the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (Birmingham MPO) via the RPCGB.
See Chapter 4 of this Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan for a detailed description of
the potential funding sources.
Shelby County Department of Transportation
City of Alabaster Public Works
6’ Sidewalk
5’ Bike
Lane
11’ Travel Lane
34’ Roadway
12’ Center Turn
Lane
60’ R.O.W
5’ Bike
Lane
1’ Elevated Curb
1’ Gutter
6’ Sidewalk
1 inch = 10 feet
County Road 11- Simsville Road Reconﬁguration
Thoroughfare Type:
Collector
Right-of Way Width:
60 Feet
Pavement Width:
44 Feet, 2 Travel Lanes (11' lanes)
Turn Lane:
Continuous Center 12 Feet
Movement:
Free Movement
Design Speed:
35 MPH
Curb
1 Foot
Walkway Type:
6 Foot Sidewalk
Transportation Provision: 5 Foot Bike Lane
11’ Travel Lane
County Road 11 (Simmsville Road) Reconfiguration Scenario
Figure 3.1: CR 11 (Simmsville Road) Proposed Roadway Section
1’ Gutter
1’ Elevated Curb
27
Table 3.2: Proposed Roadway Improvement Projects
Proposed Roadway Improvement Projects
Project
From/To
Lanes
Names
Before/
After
CR 11
U.S. 31 to
2/3
(Simmsville
Weatherly Club
Road)
Drive
CR 264
(Thompson
Road)
SR-119 to CR 44 2/3
(1st Avenue W.)
Kent Dairy
Road
CR 17 to
2/3
Kentwood Drive
CR 26 (Fulton SR 119 to U.S.
Springs Road) 31
SR 119
From CR 26
(Fulton Springs
Road) to CR 80
(Mission Hills
Road)
Alabaster
From Jimmy
Boulevard
Gould Drive to
Extension
U.S. 31
2/3
2/5
0/4
Purpose & Need
Notes
To improve traveler safety by facilitating left
turns into multiple residential driveways; to
facilitate safe pedestrian and cyclist travel to,
from and within the Environmental Justice
community.
In 2040 RTP
*See Figure
3.1 for
Proposed
Roadway
Section
Not in 2040
RTP
*Seek APPLE
Funding
To address congested conditions by
accommodating expected additional traffic
resulting from new residential development
and school expansion; to facilitate left turns
into residential development.
To improve traveler safety by facilitating
left turns in residential development and
adjacent properties; to provide continuity of
the existing 3 lane section.
To address safety conditions generated by
truck and other additional traffic.
To address congested conditions by
accommodating existing and expected
additional traffic resulting from new
residential development.
To complete existing roadway, facilitate
cross-development movement, and address
congestion.
Access Management Plans
Access Management is the process of controlling
the placement and design of intersections and
driveways that access a public roadway. Access
Management balances the need for property
owners with the need of local government to
provide a safe efficient roadway network benefiting
both. Access management plans are recommended
for the U.S. 31 Medical Mile Corridor and for SR
119. A full description of the need for access
management in the U.S. 31 Medical Mile Corridor is
included in the Medical Mile design guideline that
is included in Alabaster Forward Comprehensive
Plan document. Access management guidance is
included in Appendix D-1 of this document.
28
U.S. 31
In 2040 RTP
Not in 2040
RTP
In 2016-2019
TIP
In 2040 RTP
Roadway not
functionally
classified;
partly outside
of City Limits
Figure 3.2: Proposed Roadways for Improvement
)
"
52 Roadway Improvement Projects
Proposed
)
"
33
«
¬
261
)
"
52E
¤
£
31
)
"
58
68
ad
Ro
e
sv
ill
m
Av
e. W
.
)
"
Thompson Road
264
)
"
17
¤
£
31
1s
t
«
¬
119
)
"
270
11
Si
m
1s
t
9th Street NW
44
)
"
65
)
"
Industrial Rd.
)
"
§
¦
¨
Kent Dairy Road
)
"
26
St
re
e
tS
.
§
¦
¨
65
)
"
26
)
"
17
)
"
d
R oa
ler
Bu t
¤
£
12
oad
«
¬
31
Smokey R
119
)
"
87
)
"
24
«
¬
70
Ü
0
0.25 0.5
)
"
22
1
Miles
)
"
16
)
"
22
29
Pedestrian Projects
Suburban life has always been synonymous with long
hours in the car — going to work, school, the grocery
store, the mall, soccer practice and friends’ homes.
Some people even drive to take a walk. However,
whether they walk, cycle, or drive, everyone is a
pedestrian for at least part of each journey.
Walking, which includes movement with wheelchairs
and other mobility aids, is the cheapest and most
space-efficient way to travel. It is a key tool of
successful place-making, increasing opportunities
for community interaction, and providing healthy
opportunities for both people and the environment.
Pedestrians also are good for business. The world’s
most successful commercial streets tend to be the
ones with the highest pedestrian volumes.
There is plenty of room for improvement, and the City
of Alabaster is taking steps to develop an environment
that is accessible and interesting for walking. There
are gaps and barriers in the City’s pedestrian network,
and opportunities exist to expand and improve the
network, especially as it pertains to safety, comfort, and
accessibility. As new streets are built and existing ones
rebuilt, opportunities abound to create better streets
and improve the pedestrian travel experience. Plans
for Siluria Mill and the U.S. 31 Medical Mile contained
within the Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan,
as well as the plan’s larger concepts for land use and
transportation, are good first steps towards achieving
a much improved pedestrian environment.
Likewise, the availability of comfortable, wellconnected bike routes is critical to encouraging
more people to cycle for their daily needs and to
improving road safety. Many people are interested in
cycling. However, they avoid riding bicycles on street
because they are afraid of interacting with motor
vehicle traffic. In order for cycling to be a viable and
mainstream transportation choice, routes should feel
comfortable and low-stress for people of all ages and
abilities, including children, the elderly, and novice
cyclists.
Following are some project and programmatic
recommendations for improving the pedestrian and
cycling environment in Alabaster. Figure 3.3 highlights
the proposed Alabaster Trail Network.
Table 3.3: Alabaster Trail Network
Alabaster Trail Network
Project Purpose:
To provide Alabaster residents and visitors with a safe and pleasant
non-motorized transportation alternative for travel across the City.
Project
Extend the existing segment of the Buck Creek Trail to connect north to the U.S.
Description:
31 Medical Mile and south to Veterans Park, and build additional trail extensions
within the City to accommodate both bicycles and pedestrians as an alternative
transportation route.
Time Frame:
0 - 10 years
Potential Funding:
• Transportation Alternatives Program
• Local Funding
(TAP)
• Public/Private Partnerships
• Recreational Trails Program (RTP)
Lead Agency:
30
• Advanced Planning
• Partnership Agreement with Shelby
Programming and Logical
County
Engineering (APPLE)
See Chapter 4 of this Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan for a detailed
description of the potential funding sources.
City of Alabaster
Public Works
Parks and Recreation Department
Figure 3.3: Alabaster Trail Network
)
"
52 Buck Creek Trail
Existing
Proposed Trails
261
Parks and Open Space
)
"
33
«
¬
)
"
52E
¤
£
31
)
"
58
68
ad
Ro
e
sv
ill
m
Av
e. W
.
)
"
Thompson Road
264
)
"
17
¤
£
31
1s
t
«
¬
119
)
"
270
11
Si
m
1s
t
9th Street NW
44
)
"
65
)
"
Industrial Rd.
)
"
§
¦
¨
Kent Dairy Road
)
"
26
St
re
e
tS
.
§
¦
¨
65
)
"
26
)
"
17
R oa
)
"
d
¤
£
12
«
¬
31
oad
ler
Bu t
Smokey R
119
)
"
87
)
"
24
«
¬
70
Ü
0
0.25 0.5
)
"
22
1
Miles
)
"
16
)
"
22
31
Table 3.4: Alabaster Complete Streets Program, Sidewalk Development
Alabaster Complete Streets Program
Component 1. Sidewalk Development
Project Purpose: To improve pedestrian mobility within the City, with a focus on increasing mobility
within neighborhoods and neighborhood centers.
Project
This program component will design and construct pedestrian facilities throughout the
Description:
City of Alabaster. This includes:
• Retrofitting sidewalks into existing communities/centers
• Eliminating obstructions in clear zone (such as utility poles, bus shelters, etc.)
along existing sidewalks
• Providing guidance for new sidewalks
It also would include the design and construction of ADA accessible ramps, pedestrian
signals, and crosswalks. A list of specific projects are identified below, and are based
on priority needs - critical connections, the ability to close gaps, pedestrian access and
safety.
Time Frame:
Potential
Funding:
Note: Sidewalks within new subdivisions and residential development are required
under City of Alabaster subdivision regulations.
0-15 years
• Transportation Alternative Program
• Local Funding
(TAP)
• Public/Private Partnerships
• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
(CMAQ)
Lead Agency:
Proposed
Projects:
• Advanced Planning Programming
and Logical Engineering (APPLE)
See Chapter 4 of this Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan for a detailed description
of the potential funding sources.
• 6th Avenue SW from Market Center Drive to Buck Creek Park Driveway
• CR 11/Simmsville Road from U.S. 31 to Weatherly Club Drive
• Thompson Road from Buck Creek Trail Crossing to Evangel Christian School
• Buck Creek Plaza between Plaza Circle and Kent Dairy Road
• Plaza Circle from Kent Stone Way to Alabaster YMCA
• Kent Dairy Road from SR 119/Publix Parking to Harris Lane
• CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road) from SR 119 to proposed new trail east or Widgeon
Drive
• SR 119 from CR 26 (Fulton Springs Road) to CR 80 (Mission Hills Road)
• SR 119 Streetscape Plan (see Streetscape Program later in this chapter)
Implementation
Notes:
• U.S. 31 Medical Mile / Portion of Industrial Boulevard
Sidewalks can be completed as part of a scheduled roadway widening project. For
additional information about project eligibility and other potential funding, contact the
Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (Birmingham MPO) via the RPCGB.
Figure 3.4 identifies the priority sidewalks for development component of the Alabaster’s Complete Streets
Program.
32
Figure 3.4: Priority Roads for Sidewalk Development
"
)
Priority 52
Roads for Sidewalk Development
"
)
33
¬
«
261
"
)
52E
£
¤
31
"
)
58
68
Ro
ad
ill
e
sv
.W
.
m
Av
e
"
)
Thompson Road
264
"
)
17
£
¤
31
1s
t
¬
«
119
"
)
270
11
Si
m
1s
t
9th Street NW
44
"
)
65
"
)
Industrial Rd.
"
)
§
¦
¨
Kent Dairy Road
"
)
26
St
re
et
S.
§
¦
¨
65
"
)
26
"
)
17
Ro a
"
)
d
£
¤
12
¬
«
31
Smokey R
oad
ler
But
119
"
)
87
"
)
24
¬
«
70
Ü
0
0.25 0.5
"
)
22
1
Miles
"
)
16
"
)
22
33
Table 3.5: Alabaster Complete Streets Program, Priority Pedestrian Crossings
Component 2. Priority Pedestrian Crossings
Project Purpose: To provide safe pedestrian crossings across roadways in order to facilitate access to
land uses and support pedestrian mobility.
Project
This program component will add new pedestrian crosswalks and will improve existing
Description:
pedestrian crossings at both intersections and mid-block locations. The component
will accomplish the following:
• Bringing all existing pedestrian crossings to ADA-compliance standards
• Install pedestrian ramps and marked crossings at signalized intersections
• Install countdown pedestrian signals at all existing and proposed signalized
intersections
Time Frame:
Potential
Funding:
Lead Agency:
Proposed
Projects:
• Convert left-turn signal phasing from lead to lag (where possible)
0-5 years
• Surface Transportation
• Local Funding
Program (STP)
• U.S. 31 at CR 66 (Industrial
• SR 119 at Market Center Drive
Road)
• SR 119 at CR 264 (Thompson Road)
• U.S. 31 at 7th Avenue
• U.S. 31 at CR 44 (1st Avenue)
Implementation
Notes:
• SR 119 at Plaza Circle (Kent Stone Way)
• SR 119 at Kent Dairy Road
• U.S. 31 at CR 11 (Simmsville
Road)
Use of local funding is strongly recommended for designing and installing pedestrian
crossings. For additional information about project eligibility and other potential
funding, contact the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (Birmingham
MPO) via the RPCGB.
Figure 3.5 identifies the priority pedestrian crossings component of the Alabaster’s Complete Streets
Program.
34
Figure 3.5: Priority Pedestrian Crossings
!
.
)
"
52
Proposed
Pedestrian Crossings
)
"
33
«
¬
261
)
"
52E
¤
£
31
)
"
58
Thompson Road
264
17
)
"
270
ad
Ro
e
)
"
)
"
sv
ill
!
.
!
!.
.
31
¤
£
m
Av
e. W
.
Si
m
1s
t
!
.
119
«
¬
Kent Dairy Road
11
68
!
.
!
.
9th Street NW
44
)
"
65
)
"
Industrial Rd.
)
"
§
¦
¨
!
.
!
.
1s
t
)
"
26
St
re
e
tS
.
§
¦
¨
65
)
"
26
)
"
17
)
"
d
R oa
ler
t
u
B
¤
£
12
oad
«
¬
31
Smokey R
119
)
"
87
)
"
24
«
¬
70
Ü
0
0.25 0.5
)
"
22
1
Miles
)
"
16
)
"
22
35
Table 3.6: Alabaster Complete Streets Program, On-street Bicycle Facilities
Component 3. On-street Bicycle Facilities
Project Purpose: To provide Alabaster residents and visitors with a safe and pleasant cycling experience.
Project
This project component will design and construct on-street bicycle facilities throughout the
Description:
City of Alabaster. This includes:
• Retrofitting roadways to include bicycle facilities in existing communities/centers
• Eliminating obstructions in clear zone (such as utility poles, bus shelters, etc.) along
existing roadways.
Time Frame:
Potential
Funding:
Lead Agency:
Proposed
Projects:
• Providing guidance for new bicycle facilities.
0-10 years
• Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
• Local Funding
• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)
See Chapter 4 of this Alabaster Forward Transportation Plan for a detailed description of the
potential funding sources.
On-Street Facilities
Signed Routes/Sharrows
• U.S. 31 from CR 66 (Industrial Road) to SR 119
from U.S. 31 to Weatherly Club Drive
• CR 95
• SR 119
• CR 44 (1st Avenue W.)
◦◦ Phase 1: Market Center Drive to CR 26
◦◦ Phase 2: CR 26 to Veterans Park
• Weatherly Club Drive from Weatherly Way to
Alabaster Boulevard Extension
• 6th Avenue SW
• CR 264 (Thompson
Road)
• Kent Dairy Road
• CR 26 (Fulton Springs
Road)
• Alabaster Boulevard Extension from Weatherly Club
Drive to Jimmy Gould Drive
Implementation U.S. 31 on-street bicycle facilities are a part of the larger, proposed U.S. 31 Medical Mile
Notes:
Corridor that is included with the Alabaster Forward Comprehensive Plan. Please see it for
details.
On-street bicycle facilities for the CR 11 (Simmsville Road) and SR 119 corridors might be
included in the programmed and planned roadway widening projects for these routes.
The Buck Creek Trail (both existing and proposed segments) acts as a connecting spine to
proposed bicycle facilities as an alternative transportation route.
Figure 3.6 depicts the on-street bicycle facilities component of the Alabaster’s Complete Street Program.
36
When the Buck Creek Trail extension along with the recommended components of the Complete Streets program
are combined, a complete picture of the City of Alabaster’s non-motorized transportation network becomes
clearer. Figure 3.7 portrays this network and all of its components.
Figure 3.6: On-street Bicycle Facilities Map
)
"
52 Weatherly Bike Lane
Existing
)
"
33
On-Street Bicycle Facilities
«
¬
Proposed On-street Bicycle Facilities
261
)
"
52E
¤
£
31
)
"
58
§
¦
¨
)
"
65
11
½
¾
½
¾
)
"
68
Industrial Rd.
9th Street NW
½
¾
¾
Ro
e
sv
ill
e. W
½.
¾
m
½1st Av
¾
½
¾
)
"
Si
m
44
)
½"
¾
½
¾
½
¾
ad
½
¾
½
¾
264
)
"
17
½
¾
Thompson Road
½
¾
¤
£
31
1s
t
«
¬
119
Kent Dairy Road
½
¾
270
½
¾
)
"
½
¾
½
¾
½
¾
½
¾
½
¾
"¾½
)
26
St
re
e
tS
.
§
¦
¨
65
)
"
26
)
"
17
)
"
d
R oa
¤
£
12
«
¬
31
oad
ler
Bu t
119
Smokey R
½
¾
Marked Bicycle Lane
Signed Route or Sharrows
)
"
87
)
"
24
«
¬
70
Ü
0
0.25 0.5
)
"
22
1
Miles
)
"
16
)
"
22
37
Figure 3.7: The City of Alabaster Composite Non-motorized Transportation Network Map
)
"
Priority Roads
for Sidewalk Development
52
!
.
)
"
Proposed Pedestrian Crossings
33
«
¬
261
Existing Buck Creek Trail
Proposed Trails
Existing Weatherly Bike Lane
Proposed Marked Bicycle Lane
½
¾
)
"
52E
Proposed Signed Route or Sharrows
Parks and Open Space
¤
£
31
)
"
58
§
¦
¨
)
"
65
11
½
¾
½
¾
)
"
68
Industrial Rd.
½
¾
!
.
!
!.
.
31
¤
£
¾
)
"
Kent Dairy Road
½
¾
½
¾
270
!
.
119
«
¬
!
.
!
.
½
¾
)
"
½
¾
Thompson Road
½
¾
17
Ro
e
264
)
"
sv
ill
e. W
½.
¾
m
½1st Av
¾
Si
m
44
)
½"
¾
½
¾
¾½
ad
½
¾
½
¾
9th Street NW
½
¾
!
.
!
.
½
¾
½
¾
½
¾
½
¾
1s
t
"¾½
)
26
St
re
e
tS
.
§
¦
¨
65
)
"
26
)
"
17
R oa
)
"
d
¤
£
12
«
¬
31
oad
ler
Bu t
Smokey R
119
)
"
87
)
"
24
«
¬
70
Ü
38
0
0.25 0.5
)
"
22
1
Miles
)
"
16
)
"
22
Transit Projects
It is recommended that the City of Alabaster explore
the feasibility of establishing a community shuttle/
circulator service. Public transit offers an inexpensive
and economical alternative to the private car,
complementing walking and cycling by extending the
range a person can travel. It has the ability to seamlessly
link communities to one another, and supports the
development of pedestrian-oriented places. Transit
has the capability to move large numbers of people in
small amounts of space, provide support for growing
economies and reduce congestion. By providing lowbarrier access to key destinations, it supports an
inclusive city where everyone can meet their daily
needs.
Regional Express Bus Service
In 2010, the RPCGB completed the I-65/U.S. 31 Mobility
Matters project, a corridor alternatives analysis for
the I-65 corridor. Mobility Matters determined that
express bus service from Alabaster to Birmingham
was indeed feasible. The study identified the Propst
Promenade as a formal park and ride location to serve
this services (see Figure 3.8). The Propst Promenade
currently serves as an informal park and ride facility for
commuters participating in the regional carpool and
vanpool programs (CommteSmart). As envisioned,
transit services would operate during AM and PM
peak travel periods. It also would accommodate
reverse commutes (commutes from the central city
to the suburbs). In addtion, due to the amount of
commuters that get stuck in congestion along SR 119
and U.S. 31, the City could consider a park and ride
location or transit stop along SR 119 near Siluria Mill.
Table 3.7: Transportation Recommendations, Propst Promenade Park and Ride Lot
Propst Promenade Park and Ride Lot
Project Purpose: To provide convenient and safe access to regional transportation services for
individuals commuting into and from the City of Alabaster.
Project
Formalization of the existing informal park and ride lot located at the Propst
Description:
Promenade. This would include designated parking areas, bus shelters and passenger
waiting areas, vehicle berths and signage.
Time Frame:
0- 5
Potential
• Local Funding
Funding:
Lead Agency:
City of Alabaster Administration
Implementation Formalization of the parking facilities located at the Propst Promenade as a designated
Notes:
park and ride lot might be accomplished as follows:
Secure/establish a shared use agreements with the property owner. The property
owner may require that spaces be leased, as well as stipulate conditions for use of
the lot i.e. security, maintenance, striping, resurfacing, etc. The shared use agreement
should articulate these conditions, responsibilities, and remedies for disputes, as well
as the terms of termination.
The RPCGB’s CommuteSmart program could potentially assist with some maintenance
expenses. However, this assistance is limited. The City should consult the
CommuteSmart program for additional information. The City also should consult their
legal counsel for additional guidance.
39
Figure 3.8: I-65 / U.S. 31 Mobility Matters project (Bus Rapid Transit Route E)
Figure 2.10: BRT Route E
Tier 2 Alternatives Evaluation Report
January 2011
40
I-65 / US 31 Mobility Matters Project
Page 18
Table 3.8: Transportation Recommendations, Regional Express Bus Service
Regional Express Bus Service
Project Purpose: To provide fast, convenient, reliable, comfortable, and safe transportation for City of
individuals commuting into and from the City of Alabaster.
Project
Commuter bus service operating out of park and ride lots, offering peak hour trips into
Description:
the region’s population and employment core as well as reverse commute trips from
the same.
Time Frame:
5 - 10 years
Potential
• FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula
• Local Funding
Funding:
Grant
Local funding might be necessary to help support the service’s operations, to leverage
federal funding, or to offset expenditures associated with capital costs.
FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area funding may be utilized to finance transit services
covering the reverse commute.
Lead Agency:
Implementation
Notes:
Work with the Birmingham Jefferson County Transit Authority (BJCTA) to secure
FTA Section 5307 funding and establish the express bus service, focusing on the
reverse commute aspect. BJCTA is the Birmingham metropolitan planning area’s
designated recipient of federal transit formula funding. They are responsible for the
administration and oversight of these monies are directly accountable to the Federal
Transit Administration.
Station envisioned by the I-65 /U.S. 31 Mobility Matters Project.
41
Proposed Local Shuttle/Circulator
Service
In addition to the express bus service described
above, the Alabaster Forward public involvement
process collected a number of comments about
residents’ desire for a convenient and accessible
public transportation service. Comments specifically
collected from the City’s senior population indicated
that in addition to the existing ClasTran services
that brings senior residents to and from the City’s
senior center, that there is a need for accessible and
reliable transportation, especially to medical services.
In addition to providing connections for seniors,
this transit service also might connect Alabaster’s
residential communities/subdivisions to civic areas
such as the Alabaster Senior Center and City Hall, the
U.S. 31 Medical Mile, the Propst Promenade, and the
neighborhood centers.
A proposed route map for the Alabaster local
shuttle/circulator service is shown in Figure3.9. It
is envisioned that the route could start at the White
Stone Center (Publix Supermarket) on SR 119 at CR
26. The shuttle would then proceed north on SR
119 to Kent Dairy Road, turn left onto Kent Dairy
Road and then an immediate right onto Buck Creek
Plaza. Proceed north and provide a stop at Buck
Creek Plaza. The shuttle would then turn right onto
Kent Stone Way and an immediate left onto SR 119.
Traveling north on SR 119, the shuttle would provide
a stop at the intersection of SR 119 and Thompson
Road. Next the shuttle would continue north on SR
119, and turn left onto 14th Avenue SW to 7th Street
SW, providing a stop at the Alabaster Senior Center /
City Hall. The shuttle would then take 11th Avenue
SW back to SR 119, turning left onto SR 119, and
proceeding to the intersection of U.S. 31 and Market
Center Drive. The shuttle would then make a left
onto Market Center Drive and then a left into the
Foodland shopping center, providing a stop. It would
then loop back to turn left onto SR 119. At the
intersection with U.S. 31, the shuttle would turn left
onto U.S. 31 and proceed north on U.S. 31. It would
take a right onto 7th Avenue NE, providing a stop
at the front entrance to the Shelby Baptist Medical
Center. The shuttle would then turn right out of the
parking lot onto U.S. 31, and proceed north until
taking a right at the intersection with Industrial Drive
Example of a local shuttle bus.
42
to provide a stop at the 1022 Medical Tower. Next
the shuttle would turn right onto U.S. 31, proceeding
to the intersection of CR 68, turning left into the
shopping center and providing a stop at the Food
Depot. That stop is at the northern most point of
the city limits on U.S 31, and thus the shuttle could
route back along the same route as described.
As shown in Figure 3.9, two branches to the main
shuttle route could be considered. One branch from
the main circulator could leave from the Foodland
shopping center stop off Market Center Drive and
turn right onto U.S. 31. The shuttle would travel
down U.S. 31 to the Propst Promenade, providing
a stop at the AmStar 14 (movie theater). Upon
returning to the intersection with SR 119, the shuttle
could turn right onto CR 11 (Simmsville Road), and
then an immediate left into the Aldi’s parking lot,
providing an additional stop at the grocery store.
The shuttle would then turn right, back onto CR 11
(Simmsville Road), and another right onto U.S. 31,
traveling north to the Shelby County Medical Center
stop. Another branch of the circulator could include
an extension from the stop at White Stone Center
(SR 119 and CR 26), utilizing SR 119 to travel south
to Veterans Park. This branch to Veterans Park could
run in the afternoon and weekends during the school
year, and all day during the summer. This would
also allow connections for after school activities.
In summary, the major stops for the Alabaster local
shuttle/circulator service could include:
White Stone Center off SR 119 at (Publix
Supercenter)
• Buck Creek Plaza off SR 119
• Thompson Road at SR 119
• Alabaster Senior Center/City Hall
• Market Center Drive at SR 119 (Foodland
shopping center)
• U.S. 31 at 7th Avenue NE (Shelby Baptist
Medical Center)
As envisioned, this shuttle/circulator is a personalized
bus service that travels within the City of Alabaster. It
would operate as a hybrid subscription/flexible route
service. As a subscription service, travelers can call
to schedule recurring trips. That is, trips that occur
at the same time and location. This is particularly
useful for people that maintain regular schedules
such as seniors and people with recurring medical
appointments. Travelers who have subscribed to the
service will be picked up and dropped off on their
schedule until they cancel.
The flex route service would operate during morning
and evening commute periods, as well as during the
mid-day lunch period. Flex routes offer commuters
a reservation-free ride during morning and evening
rush-hours, picking travelers up and dropping them
off at scheduled stops and times along the route. Like
any traditional bus stop, travelers simply need to wait
at a designated stop to access the service.
Alabaster does not currently own or operate any
transit system. Further, it is not in the Birmingham
Jefferson County Transit Authority (BJCTA) service
area, although it is located within the federally
designated urbanized area (UZA) for which the BJCTA
is the designated recipient of all urbanized area
formula funding. The little transit service that is
provided within the City of Alabaster’s boundaries by
ClasTran is narrowly focused on elderly and disabled
individuals. It is believed that the City can support
a cost-effective, public transit service that connects
its communities with neighborhood retail centers,
civic facilities, and the many services provided
along the Medical Mile. Alabaster also is primed
to take advantage of the potential opportunities
offered by a proposed future regional express bus
commuter service. On the following pages are a set
of transportation recommendations specific to the
provision of public transit.
• U.S 31 at Industrial Drive (1022 Medical Tower)
• U.S 31 at CR 68 (Food Depot shopping center)
• Optional branch stop - Propst Promenade
(AmStar 14 movie theater)
• Optional branch stop - Aldi’s U.S. 31 at CR 11
• Optional branch stop – Veterans Park off SR
119
43
Figure 3.9: Proposed Route and Stops for the Alabaster Local Shuttle/ Circulator Service
52
Proposed"
)
Local Shutte Route
)
"
33
Main route
261
«
¬
Possible branch routes
£ Proposed Shuttle Stops
n
)
"
52E
¤
£
31
)
"
58
£
n
68
Thompson Road
264
17
)
"
270
Ro
e
sv
ill
)
"
)
"
ad
£
n
m
Av
e. W
.
11
Si
m
44
9th Street NW
)
"
)
"
65
)
"
Industrial Rd.
1s
t
§
¦
¨
£
£n
n
£
n
¤
£
31
£
n
£
n
Kent Dairy Road
1s
t
£
n
£
n
)
"
26
St
re
e
tS
.
§
¦
¨
65
)
"
26
)
"
17
R oa
)
"
d
¤
£
12
«
¬
31
oad
ler
Bu t
Smokey R
119
£
n
)
"
87
)
"
24
«
¬
70
Ü
44
0
0.25 0.5
)
"
22
1
Miles
)
"
16
)
"
22
Table 3.9: Transportation Recommendations, Local Shuttle/Circulator Service
Local Shuttle/Circulator Service
Project Purpose: To provide fast, convenient, reliable, comfortable, and safe transportation for City of
Alabaster residents and visitors.
Project
A public transportation system that operates as a shuttle/circulator, is accessible by
Description:
both subscription and common bus stops, and follows a flexible route based on a fixed
service area.
Time Frame:
0 - 5 years
Potential
• FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula
• Local Funding
Funding:
Grant
• Public/private partnerships
Lead Agency:
Implementation
Notes:
• FTA Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities
The simplest and fastest way for the City of Alabaster to implement this service is to go
with a turn-key service. Under a turn-key operation, the City would contract with an
existing transportation company to provide public transit services. The service provider
will supply vehicles, drivers, and a ride reservation call center/customer service. They
also will maintain the vehicles. This option, while easy and fast, also is typically the
most expensive as the service provider passes along their costs to secure/provide
vehicles.
A similar implementation methodology is for the City to purchase vehicles and turn
them over to a transportation provider to operate. Like the full turn-key service that
was previously described, the transportation service provider supplies drivers and ride
reservation services (call center) and customer service. Vehicle maintenance services
are also optional as the City might choose to maintain these via their existing fleet
services.
Other options for implementing this service include contracting with existing public
agencies that provide transportation services e.g. the Birmingham Jefferson County
Transit Authority (BJCTA). BJCTA can offer the same services as a private provider.
However, they are bound by federal law for public transportation, and this greatly limits
their flexibility in terms of cost and time as there are specified processes that need to
occur in order to make service changes.
Other things to consider in looking to advance this recommendation are advantages
and limitations on the use of federal funding. For example, FTA Section 5307 funding
might be used to make improvements along roadway rights-of-way, specifically for
public transportation services. This might include ADA improvements at bus stops,
pedestrian access, and shelters. Likewise, if the City so chooses to own a fleet of transit
vehicles, the Section 5339 program might be used to purchase buses.
Limitations on the use of federal aid for transit include limitation on funding for service
operations. Because of this, local funding is very likely to be necessary in order to
financially support the service’s day to day operations.
45
Freight Projects
The City of Alabaster is fast emerging as one of the
region’s key distribution hubs. During the past ten
years, the City has managed to attract a number
of manufacturing and warehousing opportunities.
Alabaster is attempting to direct its industrial
development away from residential development,
and closer to both I-65 and existing industrial areas
located in unincorporated Shelby County. Additionally,
Alabaster’s historic link to mining and the presence of
several active, large quarries, coupled with the City’s
growth as a center for warehousing and distribution
centers has implications for the City’s transportation
future, and likely will continue to encourage increases
in truck traffic to, from, within and through the City.
As Alabaster continues to grow, additional
investments in transportation infrastructure and
operations to address existing issues and support
future growth is needed. Strategic improvements for
freight should be included among these investments,
and will be essential for the City’s economic future.
An effective support system for goods movement
can have many benefits for an area’s economy,
neighborhoods and traffic congestion. Infrastructure,
policies, and education or enforcement program
recommendations for freight movement into, out of,
and through Alabaster are intended to address the
Alabaster Forward’s Comprehensive Plan goals for
growth, development, quality of live and travel, as
well as the overall vision for the transportation system
as expressed in the Alabaster Forward Transportation
Plan.
Freight Truck with limited turning radius. Source: ISSUU.com
Recommendations specific to freight and the
transportation system are summarized in Tables 3.10
and Table 3.11 and shown in Figure 3.10.
In addition to designating truck routes, implementing
physical and operational improvements on highdemand truck routes to better manage traffic
congestion and improve the efficiency of freight
movement should be considered.
Physical or
operational improvements may include:
• Adding/widening shoulders
• Intersection improvements to increase turning
radii
• Signal improvements
These actions all have the potential to increase
the efficiency of freight movements. As the City is
trying to redevelop its travel network to be more
accommodating of non-motorized travel modes,
multimodal safety should be maintained with
any intersection or roadway adjustments. Freight
improvements, especially along corridor projects,
should be coordinated with other multimodal
investments.
Freight Truck. Source ACEEE.org
46
Table 3.10: Freight Projects, Designate Truck Routes
Designate Truck Routes
Project Purpose: To provide for the safe and efficient movement of truck traffic into, out of, through, and
within the City of Alabaster.
Project
Designate a Truck Route System that restricts the operation of any motor vehicle in
Description:
excess of 8,000 pounds or any vehicle with a registered weight greater than 8,000
pounds on any street not designated and posted as a truck route.
Time Frame:
0-5 years
Potential
• Local Funding (City/County)
Funding:
Lead Agency:
Proposed
• CR 68
• U.S. 31
Projects:
• Old U.S. 31
• SR 119
• CR 87
• CR 12 (Butler Road / Smokey Road)
• Kent Dairy Road
Implementation In addition to designating truck routes, the City of Alabaster needs to support this
Notes:
important policy with a comprehensive signage program. The signage program will
ensure that truck routes are easily recognized, graphically consistent, and follow
standards established in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Signs
should be located at key decision points in the truck route network and have a standard
placement to improve way finding for drivers.
Kent Dairy Road
U.S. 31
47
Figure 3.10: Freight Projects
"
)
2
%
52 Designated Freight Truck Routes
Proposed
Proposed Intersections Needing Improvement for Freight33
261
"
)
¬
«
"
)
52E
31
£
¤
58
"
)
Ro
ad
ill
e
sv
m
.W
.
Si
m
Av
e
9th Street NW
1s
t
264
"
)
2
%
31
£
Thompson Road
"
)
17
¤
1s
t
2
%
¬
«
119
"
)
270
11
"
)
65
68
"
)
Industrial Rd.
44
"
)
§
¦
¨
Kent Dairy Road
2
%
%
2
26
"
)
St
re
et
S.
§
¦
¨
65
26
"
)
"
)
17
Ro a
12
"
)
d
¬
«
31
£
¤
Smokey R
oad
ler
But
119
87
"
)
%
2
2
%
24
"
)
¬
«
70
Ü
48
0
0.25 0.5
22
"
)
1
Miles
16
"
)
22
"
)
Table 3.11: Freight Projects, Physical Improvements to Freight
Physical Improvements for Freight
Project Purpose: To facilitate the safe and efficient movement of truck traffic.
Project
Physical and operational improvements on high-demand truck routes to better
Description:
manage traffic congestion and improve efficiency.
Time Frame:
0-5 years
Potential
• Local Funding
Funding:
• Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ)
• Advanced Planning Programming and Logical Engineering (APPLE)
Lead Agency:
Proposed
Projects:
Intersection/Roadway Improvements for Freight
• Southbound ramps: I-65 Exit 234 at CR 87
• CR 87 at Weather Vane Road
• U.S. 31 at CR 11 (Simmsville Road)
• Interchange Modification on I-65 at CR 87 Exit 234
• SR 119 at Thompson Road
• SR 119 at Plaza Circle (Kent Stone Way)
Implementation
Notes:
• SR 119 at Kent Dairy Road
For additional information about project eligibility and other potential funding, contact
the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (Birmingham MPO) via the
RPCGB.
CR 87 at Weather Vane Road
U.S. 31 at CR 11 (Simmsville Road) intersection.
49
Policy and Programmatic
Recommendations
Streetscape Program
In efforts to make major travel corridors more
functional and aesthetically pleasing, streetscape
specifications should be developed. These
specifications should provide a common design
standard for new and modified traffic signals (mast
arm, not span-wire), street furniture, sidewalks,
landscaping and wayfinding/informational signage.
The specifications may be incorporated into overlay
districts specific to a roadway and/or corridor, in
order to provide guidance for retrofitting existing
corridors, or can be applied to all new construction
projects along the corridor. Streetscape plans are
recommended for both the U.S. 31 Medial Mile and
SR 119 corridors. Streetscape guidance is provided
in the U.S. 31 Medical Mile design guidelines that
is included as a part of the Alabaster Forward
Comprehensive Plan. Streetscape guidance also
needs to be developed for SR 119.
Streetscape in Downtown Atlanta.
Table 3.12: Policy and Programmatic Recommendations, Streetscape Program
Streetscape Program
Project Purpose:
To provide guidance for improving the aesthetic quality of major travel corridors.
Time Frame:
0-5 years
Potential Funding:
• Local Funding
• Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
See Chapter 4 of this Transportation Plan for a detailed description of the potential
funding sources.
Lead Agency:
City of Alabaster Planning and Zoning Department
Proposed Projects:
• U.S. 31
Implementation
Notes:
50
• SR 119
Streetscape Design Standards and Guidelines may be developed as part of a Zoning
Overlay District.
Zoning and Development Review
Zoning ordinance and land development regulations
are an important tool for helping the City achieve
its transportation system development vision. It
is recommended that the City of Alabaster review
and, where necessary, modify its zoning regulations
to require new development to allow convenient
circulation, as well as to provide multiple, alternative
outlets from the neighborhood to adjoining
neighborhoods and / or major streets. These should
include access management policies that will manage
entry to and from adjacent properties, and that will
preserve traffic flow in terms of safety, capacity and
speed. Additionally, the City should review and
modify, where necessary, its subdivision regulations
to require that new large scale developments submit
traffic impact studies.
The City of Alabaster Traffic and Vechiles Zoning Ordiances.
(Source: https://www.municode.com/library/al/alabaster/codes/
code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIGEOR_CH42TRVE_ARTIINGE)
Access management guidance is provided in
Appendix D-1.
Guidance for traffic studies is
provided in Appendix D-2.
Table 3.13: Policy and Programmatic Recommendations, Zoning and Development Review
Zoning and Development Review
Project Purpose:
To provide guidance for new development as it relates to transportation
infrastructure improvements.
Time Frame:
0-5 years
Potential Funding:
• Local Funding
Lead Agency:
51
Transportation
Infrastructure Maintenance
Transportation infrastructure maintenance is a very
importation element of an overall transportation
system development strategy. The Alabaster Forward
Transportation Plan recommends that the City
establish a Local Transportation Investment Program
(LTIP) specifically to address transportation system
maintenance. The LTIP would need to be adopted
by the Alabaster City Council. The City Council will be
responsible for providing funding to the LTIP. The LTP
would be implemented by City staff. City staff also will
maintain the LTIP, providing regular updates.
As envisioned herein, the LTIP would primarily consist
of a maintenance program. The LTIP also might include
existing and planned transportation projects, as well
as programs (Complete Streets), which can address
the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan,
and specifically, the transportation vision. The LTIP
may serve as a capital improvement program for
transportation, and should be used to inform the
City’s annual budgeting processes. Finally, the LTIP
should help the City of Alabaster in its interaction
with Shelby County, and assist both the City and the
County identify partnering opportunities.
Through the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning
Organization’s (MPO) federal aid funding program,
local governments like Alabaster that are within the
Birmingham MPO area can apply for and receive federal
transportation funds to plan, design and construct
projects. These projects may be on the local roadway
system (capacity projects, new roadways, roadway
extensions, intersection improvements, sidewalk/
trail projects on local roadways, etc.) or in partnership
with Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT)
for projects that are on the state or federal highway
system (capacity or improvement projects on state
or federal highways, interchanges or interchange
modifications on the interstate system, etc.).
There are several major revenue sources that are
available to the Birmingham MPO to assist with
the funding of a variety of transportation services,
facilities, and physical projects. These funding sources
are primarily federal in origin. The following includes
detailed descriptions of the federal roadway and
transit funding sources provided under the federal
legislation of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century (MAP-21). Funding authorization for MAP21 is set to expire in summer 2015. It is uncertain
at this time if Congress will choose to extend this
program, terminate the program, or replace it. The
funding amounts discussed in the following program
descriptions are based on the current funding
authorization. The descriptions include a funding
ratio to show the local match required for each of the
funding programs.
Table 3.14: Local Transportation Investment Program
Local Transportation Investment Program
Project Purpose:
To provide funding and guidance for transportation system maintenance and capital projects.
Time Frame:
0-5 years
Potential Funding:
Lead Agency:
52
• Local Funding
53
54
Alabaster Forward: Appendix B Transportation Plan
CHAPTER 4 A
Potential Funding
Sources
55
Potential Funding Sources
Federal Funding Sources
Advanced Planning Programming and
Logical Engineering (APPLE)
• Engineering evaluation of proposed projects,
which involves the development of conceptual
or preliminary designs / layouts for proposed
projects.
This may include developing
conceptual or preliminary layouts of:
◦◦ Roundabouts
improvements
The Regional Planning Commission of Greater
Birmingham operates the
Advanced Planning
Programming and
Logical Engineering (APPLE)
program intended for helping local governments
in the Birmingham MPO area conduct planning
and feasibility studies for proposed transportation
projects in advance of pursuing federal aid through the
metropolitan planning process. APPLE is ultimately
meant to help local governments determine whether
or not to pursue a project, and whether or not federal
funding is appropriate. APPLE projects are capped
at $50k total ($40k federal/$10k local). The local
government is responsible for providing a 20% match
to the federal funding that the Birmingham MPO
applies to the project.
• Clearly defining transportation problems
◦◦ Other alternative improvements
◦◦ This
engineering
evaluation
and
development of preliminary layouts will help
identify project constraints or challenges
such as:
◦◦ Right of way constraints or needs
◦◦ Major utility relocations
◦◦ Creeks and streams to cross or bridge
◦◦ Environmentally sensitive areas
• Environmental analysis and screening of
proposed projects. Environmental screenings
for proposed projects are intended to identify
and evaluate impacts to sensitive areas such as:
◦◦ Streams, floodplains and wetlands
◦◦ Threatened and endangered species habitat
• Clearly defining a project’s scope
◦◦ Hazardous material sites
• Better
understanding
the
potential
environmental challenges benefits, and burdens
Eligible APPLE projects might include:
• Feasibility studies of proposed transportation
projects - such as capacity or intersection
improvements, sidewalk, trial or transit
projects.
◦◦ Historic resources
◦◦ Community resources (schools, parks, etc.)
APPLE studies should also involve consultation with
ALDOT and FHWA to determine the level of NEPA
(National Environmental Policy Act) environmental
document that will likely be required for a proposed
project.
• Larger scale traffic studies – studying existing
and future traffic conditions within a city or an
area and then recommending and evaluating
projects that will improve traffic flow and
reduce traffic congestion.
56
intersection
◦◦ The most feasible locations of trails and
greenways
• Articulating a project’s Purpose and Need
• Better understanding the financial costs and
impacts of pursuing potential projects
other
◦◦ Proposed roadway improvements (capacity
improvements, new alignment roadways,
roadway extensions, etc.)
The APPLE program is intended to assist local
governments with:
• Providing information to decision makers about
whether or not a project is technically and
financially feasible
or
The development of preliminary project cost
estimates that include all aspects of the project
and meet federal and ALDOT requirements. Often
times, project cost estimates only include the actual
estimated construction cost. Other costs associated
with transportation improvement projects that
must be considered include environmental studies,
engineering services, right-of-way acquisition,
utility relocations and construction engineering and
inspection (CEI).
Surface Transportation Program (STP)
• Funding Ratio: 80% Federal/20% Local
Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds provide
flexible funding that may be used for just about
any type of transportation related project. MAP-21
continues the regulation that 50 percent of a state’s
STP apportionment is suballocated to areas based on
their relative share of the total state population with
the other 50 percent available for use in any area of
the State. These suballocations to the urban areas
are called attributable funds. For the Birmingham
MPO these funds are referred to as STPBH (for
Birmingham) funds. The STP funding that ALDOT can
spend anywhere in the state is called STPAA (for Any
Area) funds.
Transportation Alternatives Program
(TAP)
The Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP)
funding is primarily used for projects defined as
transportation alternatives, including on- and off-road
pedestrian and bicycle facilities such as sidewalks and
trails. Design of these trails is not covered by TAP
funds, meaning the City would have to use other
funding for engineering services.
ALDOT and the Birmingham MPO award funding for
TAP eligible projects on an annual basis. TAP funds are
funneled from ALDOT through the Birmingham MPO.
Each year the MPO distributes approximately $1.2
million in TAP funding. The maximum grant amount
that can be issued by the MPO is $500,000. I addition
to the TAP funding administered by the MPO, ALDOT
also receives approximately $8 million in TAP funding,
which allows for 15-20 projects per year. The state
may choose to use this funding for projects located
anywhere in the state. Each state’s TAP funds are
suballocated using a formula.
TAP funds cover 80% of the construction cost of a
project, and the City would be responsible for 20% of
the construction cost plus all engineering services for
a project. The timeframe for completing a TAP project
should generally take three to five years since design
plans and construction specifications are required to
meet ALDOT standards.
MAP-21 also requires that both ALDOT and the
Birmingham MPO create an application and a
competitive process to select projects for TAP funding.
The following is a list of eligible activities for TAP
funding:
1. Construction of on-road and off-road trail
facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other
non-motorized forms of transportation,
including sidewalks, bicycle infrastructure,
pedestrian lighting, downtown streetscape
(combination of sidewalks, pedestrian lighting
and landscaping), and other transportation
projects to achieve compliance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Construction of infrastructure-related projects
and systems that will provide safe routes for
non-drivers, including children, older adults,
and individuals with disabilities to access daily
needs.
2. Conversion and use of abandoned railroad
corridors for trails for pedestrians, bicyclists, or
other non-motorized transportation users.
3. Construction of turnouts, overlooks, and
viewing areas.
4. Community
improvement
activities,
including: inventory, control, or removal of
outdoor advertising; historic preservation
and rehabilitation of historic transportation
facilities; vegetation management practices
in transportation rights-of-way to improve
roadway safety, prevent against invasive
species, and provide erosion control; and
archaeological activities relating to impacts
from implementation of a transportation
project eligible under Title 23.
57
5. Any environmental mitigation activity, including
pollution prevention and pollution abatement
activities and mitigation to address storm water
management, control, and water pollution
prevention or abatement related to highway
construction or due to highway runoff; or to
reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality or
to restore and maintain connectivity among
terrestrial or aquatic habitats
For more information visit http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environment/transportation_alternatives/.
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
(CMAQ)
• Funding Ratio: 80% Federal/20% Local - 100%
for eligible projects with ALDOT concurrence
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program
(CMAQ) Funds may be used for transportation
projects and programs that are likely to contribute
to the attainment of national ambient air quality
standards. The CMAQ was established by the
Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 and
has been continued by subsequent transportation
bills including MAP-21.
All CMAQ projects must demonstrate the three
primary elements of eligibility: transportation identity,
emissions reduction, and location in or benefitting a
nonattainment or maintenance area. While project
eligibilities are continued, there is some modification
with new language placing considerable emphasis on
select project types including electric and natural gas
vehicle infrastructure and diesel retrofits.
Eligible activities include:
2. Intermodal equipment and facility projects
that target diesel freight emissions through
direct exhaust control from vehicles or indirect
emissions reductions through improvements in
freight network logistics.
3. Alternative fuel projects including participation
in vehicle acquisitions, engine conversions, and
refueling facilities.
4. Establishment or operation of a traffic
monitoring, management, and control facility,
including the installation of advanced truck
stop electrification systems.
5. Projects that improve traffic flow, including
efforts to provide signal systemization,
construct HOV lanes, streamline intersections,
add turning lanes, improve transportation
systems management and operations that
mitigate congestion and improve air quality,
and implement ITS and other CMAQ-eligible
projects, including efforts to improve incident
and emergency response or improve mobility,
such as through real time traffic, transit and
multimodal traveler information.
6. Projects or programs that shift travel demand to
nonpeak hours or other transportation modes,
increase vehicle occupancy rates, or otherwise
reduce demand through initiatives, such as
teleworking, ridesharing, pricing, and others.
7. Transit investments, including transit vehicle
acquisitions and construction of new facilities or
improvements to facilities that increase transit
capacity. The MAP-21 provision on operating
assistance (23 USC 149(m)) is being reviewed
and guidance interpreting the provision will be
issued in the future.
8. Non-recreational bicycle transportation and
pedestrian improvements that provide a
reduction in single occupant vehicle travel.
1. Acquisition of diesel retrofits, including tailpipe
emissions control devices, and the provision of
diesel-related outreach activities.
58
Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities
Program
• Funding Ratio: 80% Federal/20% Local for
Capital Equipment and 50% Federal/50% Local
for Operating Assistance
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307
program provides apportioned funds that flow directly
to a locally selected designated recipient. These
funds may be used for capital equipment purchases
and to finance preventive maintenance on existing
capital equipment. The funding is formula-based,
with grants apportioned to urbanized areas on the
basis of population, population density, bus vehicle
revenue miles, fixed guideway revenue vehicle miles,
fixed guideway directional route miles, operating
cost and passenger miles. A portion of these funds
may be used for operational assistance in urbanized
areas over 200,000 to fixed route transit operators
that operate fewer than 100 buses in peak service.
Qualifying operators are eligible for assistance in an
amount based on an individual operator’s percentage
of all public transportation service.
MAP-21 also expanded eligible activities to include Job
Access and Reverse Commute Projects, which provide
non-traditional transportation services intended to
serve the employment-related transportation needs
of welfare recipients and low-income individuals.
These projects were previously eligible under the
repealed Section 5316 Job Access and Reverse
Commute Program.
In addition to the changes to the Urbanized Area
Formula Program, MAP-21 directed FTA to establish
and implement broad public transportation safety and
asset management regulations, which will apply to all
recipients of FTA funding once finalized.
FTA’s new formula grant program under MAP21 is established under Section 5339, replacing
the previous Discretionary Bus and Bus Facilities
program (Section 5309). This capital program
provides funding to replace, rehabilitate, and
purchase buses, vans and related equipment, and
to construct bus-related facilities. Eligible recipients
under the Bus and Bus Facilities program are States
and local governments, as well as public agencies
and private companies that are engaged in public
transportation and private non-profit organizations.
The funds may be used for the following eligible
projects: purchase and acquisition of buses for
fleet and service expansion, bus maintenance
and administrative facilities, transfer facilities, bus
malls, transportation centers, intermodal terminals,
park-and-ride stations, acquisition of replacement
vehicles, bus rebuilds, passenger amenities such as
passenger shelters and bus stop signs, accessory and
miscellaneous equipment such as mobile radio units,
supervisory vehicles, fare boxes, computers and shop
and garage equipment. The Federal share of eligible
capital costs is 80 percent of the net capital project
cost.
59
State Funding Sources
Recreation Trails Program (RTP) Fund
The Recreational Trails Program (RTP) is a funding
program established by the federal government
and administered by the Alabama Department of
Economic and Community Affairs (ADECA). The RTP
Fund was created to assist in the development and
maintenance of recreational trails and trail related
facilities for motorized and non-motorized uses. Each
year ADECA holds a pre-application meeting to discuss
the available funding and maximum grant values. This
meeting is not mandatory but is encouraged. The
2015 meeting was held on June 30, 2015 and preapplications were due July 31, 2015. A project will not
be considered if a pre-application was not submitted.
The timeframe for the 2016 grants should be similar
to the 2015 dates. Currently, ADECA has approximately $1,153,278
in RTP funds available and there are four funding
categories: non-motorized, single-use trails; nonmotorized, diverse-use trails; motorized, diverseuse trails; and education. Maximum grant funded
depends on the trail type, the activity proposed, or
the resources required. The current maximum grant
amount that can be applied for is: • $35,000 for non-motorized, single-use trails • $100,000 for non-motorized, diverse trails;
approximately • $330,000 for motorized, diverse use trails • $58,246 for education The federal share for the RTP grant is 80% of the
total eligible project costs up to either $35,000 or
$100,000. The non-federal share is 20% and may come
from state, local, or private sources. It is important
to note that the Recreational Trail Program operates
as a reimbursement funding source – applications
must prove whether actual leveraging is assured, or
the potential for leveraging is good; prior to being
accepted for funds. While the RTP Fund is competitive (approximately
12 grants are awarded a year), the Recreational Trail
Program may be utilized as an implementation tool
for future elements in Comprehensive Plans. RTP
funds cannot be used solely for the design of a trail. 60
Given the funding requirements, the RTP Fund would
be best utilized for improving trail and trail-related
resources including: • Educational projects • Developing training on trial accessibility and
sustainability • Producing trail-related educational materials • Trail protocols to monitor use, safety, conditions,
and environmental impacts • Maintenance of existing recreational trails. • Restoration of areas damaged by usage of
recreational trails and back country terrain • Development of trailside and trailhead facilities
that meet goals identified by the National
Recreation Trials Advisory Committee • The provision of features which facilitate
the access and use of trails by persons with
disabilities. • Development of urban trail linkages near homes
and workplaces (where an existing trail system
is established) It is important to note, the following: • The RTP Fund would be best utilized if matched
with additional funding sources, not as the
primary funding source for a project; • The
RTP
Fund
reimbursements; functions
through
• Extra consideration is given to applications that
request far less than the maximum funding
source ($35,000 for non-motorized single use
trails; $100,000 for non-motorized diverse use
trails); and • Extra consideration is given for non-motorize
diverse use trails. For more information about the Recreational Trail
Program, as well as links to all documents needed
for application, go to http://www.adeca.alabama.
gov/Divisions/ced/Recreation/Pages/Programs.
aspx or http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/
recreational_trails/. Alabaster Forward: Appendix D Transportation Plan
Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF) The National Park Services’ Land & Water Conservation
Fund (LWCF) is another funding program established
by the federal government and administered by the
Alabama Department of Economic and Community
Affairs (ADECA). During its lifetime, the LWCF matching
program has provided over 40,000 grants to state and
local governments. These grants have been applied
to small recreation projects as well as significant
state and national parks. Projects include parks,
playgrounds, forest and wildlife refuges, recreational
lakes and ponds, outdoor playing fields, and picnic
and camping areas. The amount of each grant varies.
As part of the requirements set forth by LWCF, ADECA
prepares a five-year planning document called the
Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
(SCORP). This plan provides various agencies with
a guide on how to plan for recreation and natural
resources. The current SCORP was adopted in 2013
and remains applicable until it is revised in 2018. At the time this plan was prepared, 2015 numbers
including the total amount of available funding and
individual grant ceiling was unknown. However, it is
assumed that these numbers would be fairly close to
the 2014 numbers. In 2014, ADECA had an estimated
$570,000 in available funding, setting the maximum
amount for an individual grant at $50,000. Since LWCF
is a 50/50 matching program, this means that for a
project receiving the maximum $50,000 grant, the
sponsoring agency would be responsible for $50,000
in order for a $100,000 project to be completely
funded. Local project costs can be paid through inkind services or cash. If the project exceeds $100,000
the sponsoring agency would be responsible for
funding the excess. LWCF grants are used by communities to build a variety
of park and recreation facilities, including bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. It should be noted that securing
LWCF funds for a trail would require the City to agree
to manage and operate the trail indefinitely. http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/lwcf/fed_state.
html http://adeca.alabama.gov/Divisions/ced/Recreation/
Pages/Programs.aspx Local Funding sources
Local governments in the Birmingham MPO area
utilize locally generated revenues such as sales taxes,
property taxes, franchise fees, business taxes, etc.
to assist them in funding for local transportation
improvements. These funds typically go directly into
the local government general fund and transportation
improvements are funded from this overall pot of
money. Revenues generated are utilized mostly
for local roadway resurfacing projects, and to a
lesser degree to provide match to federal funds for
intersection and signal improvements road widening,
and routine maintenance.
Below are some examples of potential local funding
sources:
General Obligation Bonds
Using debt to build infrastructure and make
other necessary capital improvements is standard
practice and an integral part of municipal fiscal
sustainability. This is particularly the case when
the assets will be used by both current and future
residents and businesses. That is, those paying for
the improvements will enjoy and benefit from the
capital improvements. General obligation bonds and
revenue bonds are the most common options, and
can be used for specific projects or to fund activities
in a special district. General obligation bonds are
paid back from general tax revenues and require
voter approval, and revenue bonds are paid back
from specific revenues, such as utility rates or user
fees.
Sales Taxes
Alabaster’s current sales tax is 4%, which, when added
to the state sales tax of 4% and Shelby County’s 1%,
totals a 9% sales tax experienced by the consumer.
When spending by residents, workers, and visitors
generates revenue, a small increase in sales tax can
result in a significant amount of new revenue for
specific projects or improvements.
61
Lodging Taxes
Lodging taxes are common revenue generating
mechanisms employed by municipal and county
governments. These are applied as a sales tax on the
cost per room, and revenues are often dedicated to
tourism or to the development of tourism-related
facilities. Its application to transportation is very
limited, although some local governments have
enacted this type of tax to support transportation
investments where infrastructure improvements or
transportation services are needed to enhance visitor
experience, accessibility and mobility. Alabaster’s
current lodging tax is 3% and the state lodging tax is
4%.
Public Private Partnerships (P3)
In recent years, there has been an increase in private
equity investment in public infrastructure through
Public-Private Partnerships (P3), with financing
packages that combine public and private debt,
equity, and public funding. Plain and simple, the
private sector provides an infusion of much needed
cash, and in return the public sector agrees to repay
the private investment with interest.
P3s are contractual agreements between a public
agency and a private entity, which allows greater
private sector participation in the delivery and
operation of transportation projects and facilities. P3s
involve a sharing of responsibilities, risks, and rewards
between public sector owners of transportation
facilities and a private sector partner(s), but the public
partner retains full ownership of the facility. In other
words, P3s are a procurement strategy that allow for
the transfer and/or sharing of risks associated with
project delivery.
sector participation involves taking on project risks,
such as design, finance, long-term operation, and
traffic revenue.
Development Fees / Impact Fees
Development fees are levied on developers as a
condition of real estate construction. Such fees (also
called impact fees) may be levied on commercial,
industrial, or residential development; they may be
assessed on a per-unit or per-square foot basis. While
taxes can be used for general purposes without any
link between the taxpayer and the outcome, fees
must be shown to have a link with the purposes
on which they are being spent. Impact fees must
therefore only be used to mitigate the impacts of
particular developments (for example, if a commercial
development will cause more traffic at a particular
intersection, the impact fees can be used to improve
the intersection).
Development fees can be levied on the construction
of new parking, whether in the form of entirely new
facilities or expansion of existing parking lots or
garages. This could serve an important secondary
effect of steering development to infill areas, if
parking construction in outlying areas carried heavy
development fees.
P3s have been extensively used in many industry
areas to provide infrastructure such as utilities, water/
wastewater, and health care. In the transportation
sector, P3s can be applied across modes, including
transit and structures (such as bridges), and are not
exclusively used for roadways or toll roads. While
the use of P3 as a potential source for funding
major transportation improvements has merit and
is certainly applicable in the metropolitan planning
area, it should be viewed cautiously and not relied
upon as a primary funding source. Typically, private
62
63

31 - ALABASTER FORWARD

Transcription

Similar documents

Egyptian alabaster lentoid flask New Kingdom. Mid to late 18th

the 2016 Sponsor Packet and Mail

Group Finder - WestwoodToday.com

Having a Ball in Calera

National Library Week Activities

Alabaster Reporter Faith of Our Fathers 6-30-20

Chillida - Ordovas

2012 TRIP - Onetulsa

July/August/September - Nazarene Missions International