Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance - 9096-1987 - Amending Section 24-133 Adopting New Master Thoroughfare Plan. - 07/23/1987LJM:da First Reading July 23, 1987 Agenda Item #12 Second Reading August 13,-1987 Agenda Item #9 ORDINANCE NO. 9096 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 24-133 OF THE LUBBOCK CITY CODE BY ADOPTING A NEW MASTER THOROUGHFARE PLAN; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Lubbock has determined that due to changed conditions the adoption of the 1987 Master Thoroughfare Plan Map is needed to update the existing Master Thoroughfare Plan Map for the ultimate benefit of the citizens of Lubbock and have recommended such adoption to the City Council; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Lubbock that such map be kept current as the City grows and develops; NOW THEREFORE: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK: SECTION 1. THAT Section 24-133 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Lubbock, Texas, is hereby amended to read as follows: 11sec. 24-133. Map-Adopted; Signature and Attestation. The original Master Thoroughfare Plan Map of the City is hereby amended and is replaced by the 1986 Master Thoroughfare Plan Map hereby established and adopted and made a part of this article as fully as if the same were set forth herein in detail, and such map as is hereby adopted shall bear the signature of the mayor and attestation of the city secretary for identification and authentication. All figures, letters, markings and colors on such map are made a part of this article. References in this article to the master thoroughfare plan map shall mean the 1986 Master Thoroughfare Plan Map.11 SECTION 2. THAT should any paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Ordinance be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, the remainder of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby. SECTION 3. THAT the City Secretary is hereby authorized to cause publication of the descriptive caption of this Ordinance as an alternative method provided by law. No Text AND IT IS SO ORDERED. Passed by the City Council on first reading this 23rd day of July 1987. Passed by the City Council on second reading this ...13..th day of August 1987. ~c."~~ B. C. McIN, MAYOR ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: cYtuua do f)?o.,_,,,µ_ Laura J. Mooe, Assistant City Attorney -2- I No Text THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF LUBBOCK R-185 Before me Frances Hernandez a Notarv Public in and for Lubbock Countv. Texas on this dav· personally appeared Twi I a Auf i I I' Acco u·nt Manali!e r of the S~uthwestern Newsp~- pers Corporation. publishers of the Lubbock Avalanche-.Journal .-Morning. Evening and Sunday. who being by me duly !?Worn did depose and say that said newspaper has been published continuously for more than rifty-two weeks prior to the first insertion of)his' Leli!al Notice . -------.,...----,-....,,..,--,~-No. 757377 "'." 1at [.ubbock County. Texas and the attached print- ed copy of the Le E! a I N ° t 1 Ce is a true copy of the origina I and was printed in the Lubbock Avalanche-.Journal on the following dates: AuE!us t 15, 22, 1987 376 Words@ .82 = $308.32 LUBBOCK AVALANCHE-JOURNAL Southwestern Newspapers Corporation Subscribed and sworn to before me this 27t!\iay of __ A_u_li!_u_._s_t __ , 19.!I_ ... No Text # MAP IN FILE SEE ORDINANCE No Text No Text No Text - 1 r I r- t r .. r r r ( . r r r r r r t r l ,.. I r r i. ' r I l LUBBOCK, TEXAS URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN August 1986 Prepared by Planning Department City of Lubbock, Texas In cooperation with Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation Funding for this report was provided by the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation in conjunction with Section 112 Planning Funds of the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 and the Surface Transportation Act of 1978 ii r r r r r r . r r r r r r r r r r r r i r CITY OF LUBBOCK PLANNNIRG DEPARTMENT Research and Compilation Walter Reeves, Assistant Planner · Co-Editors Randy Henson, Associate Planner Sally Still Abbe, A_ssistant Planner Assistant City Manager for Development Services James E. Bertram Senior Planner H. David Jones Assistant Planners David Buckberry Ben Goodloe Steve Gillum Secretary Sheila Indachandr iii TEXAS STATE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DISTRIC'l' 5 Mel Pope, District Engineer Jack Moore, Supervising Planning Engineer LUBBOCK CITY COUNCIL--1986 B.C. McMinn, Mayor Maggie Trejo T.J. Patterson George Carpenter Bob Nash Gary Phillips Joan Baker iv r r r r r t r r r r r- 1 ( .. r -I r ' r r TABLE OF CONTENTS IH'l'RODOCTION BACKGROUND The Thoroughfare System serial Zone Study Highways Interstate 27 Project Brownfield Road/3rd-4th Street Corridor Study POPULATION, ECONOMICS, AND LARD USE continued Sunbelt Growth Texas Tech Growth and Impacts Reese Air Force Base Growth of Industrial Activities Wholesaling and Warehousing Center. Regional Services Center Land use Development Policies Growth Trends MAJOR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Bus Facilities Railroad Facilities Motor Freight Facilities Air Transportation Facilites Transit System V 1 3 7 9 10 12 14 17 17 17 18 18 19 19 · 19 22 23 23 23 24 25 30 TRAFFIC CONTROL ARD REGULATIONS curb Parking Central Business District Parking Traffic Control Traffic Control Devices Traffic Signals Traffic Signs and Marking Channelization one-Way Streets Speed Control VEHICLE OCCUPANCY SURVEY 'l'BOROUGBFARE PLAN REVISIOR BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX vi 40 40 41 43 48 49 50 51 52 53 55 60 63 65 r r l r r r r r r ... l r \ . r r I i. . r \ ' r ' r r r t ; TABLES, FIGURES ARD MAPS Table lA: Lubbock International Airport: Passenger Boarding, Comparison by Airline, December 1984 and 1985 Table lB: 1985 Boardings at Area Airports Table 2: Lubbock International Airport: Airlines Passenger Boarding Summary, 1980-1985 Table 3: Citibus Fixed Route Operating Statistics: Weekday Service, April 1985 Table 4: Citibus Fixed Route Operating Statistics: Saturday Service, April 1985 Table 5: Citibus Current Operational Hookups and Peak Bour Bus Requirements, April 1985 Table 6: Citibus Fixed Route Ridership Historical Profile, 1972-1986 Table 7: Citibus Fixed Route Ridership and Demographic Analysis, April 1985 Table 8: Citibus Ridership Demographics by Percentage, January 1985 Exhibit l: Residential, Collector, and Industrial Street Standards Exhibit 2: Thoroughfare Standards Exhibit 31 Expressway Standards Map 1: Map 2: Table 9: One Way Streets Traffic Count Stations: Lubbock Intensive Study Area, July 1981 Lubbock Intensive Study Area: Vehicle Occupancy Rate, July 1981 28 28 29 34 35 36 37 38 39 45 46 47 54 57 58 Table 10: Lubbock Intensive study Area: Vehicle 59 Table 11: Table 12: Occupancy Rate, Summary for City of Lubbock, 1980 -1981 Traffic Volumes: Selected Lubbock Streets, 66 1964, 1968, 1971, 1983, and 2005 Selected Lubbock Intersections Having 10 or 72 More Accidents Annually: 1963, 1970, and 1984 vii Table 13: Lubbock Intersections Having 10 or 73 More Accidents Annually& 1970 and 1984 Table 14: Future Roadway Projects For Lubbock 77 Urbanized Area Table 15 Future Transit Activities for Lubbock 82 Urbanized Area viii r r r r I r r ' r r ' r r . , r r f ' I, ' r r r r r r r INTRODUCTION Transportation is the circulatory system of a city, the lifeline of the economy which carries workers and shoppers, raw materials and finished products to their destinations within the urban environment. As Lubbock experiences increasing commercial and industrial growth and becomes an even larger reception and distribution hub for the South Plains, transportation facilities and internal movement become greater concerns. Our society is a society on wheels. Very little 1riovement occurs without the assistance of vehicles in some way. Thus, accessibility to industrial and commercial areas, residential neighborhoods, financial districts, recreation centers, and general travel as a whole is essentiel. Much planning and study is done to create a system that will move goods, services, and people efficiently, conveniently, and safely. To provide balance between related land-use activities, Lubbock's transportation capacity must be designed to anticipate future transportation demand, eliminate unnecessary traffic movements, and establish a transportation system which adds to rather than detracts from the quality of urban life. The relationship of land use to transportation is complex; different land uses generate varied intensities of traffic, and traffic movement systems influence the development of land use activities. 1 Recognizing this inter-relationship, there must be coordination between land use planning and transportation planning. 2 r i ! " r ' ' r t r r r ! t r r r r r ~ I . t r r r 1 r ! . . r r BACKGROUND The City of Lubbock has commissioned and maintains updated transportation master plans to be incorporated into local planning. These plans guide the scheme of land-use activities, and through coordination of these documents between local, county, state, and federal agencies, planners attempt to determine the most useful, efficient, and convenient system for Lubbock, Texas. These documents are: LUBBOCK URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN, VOL. l & 2 (1964) LEVEL II REVIEW OF THE LUBBOCK URBAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN, Volume 2, (1964-1985); Volume 3, (1970-1990); Volume 4, (1980-2005) MASTER PLAN FOR WEST TEX AIR TERMINAL, LUBBOCK (1969) MASTER PLAN REVIEW, LUBBOCK REGIONAL AIRPORT (1971) MASTER PLAN REVIEW, LUBBOCK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (1981) TRANSIT FOR LUBBOCK'S FUTURE (1972) The Federal Highway Act of 1962 requires all cities with a population of 50,000 or more that use federal funds for transportation to have a comprehensive and continuing transportation plan. To comply, in 1969 the City of Lubbock and Lubbock County entered into a •continuing phase agreement• with the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (SDHPT) for the organization and study scope of the Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan. States and cities structure the committees responsible for the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and the Unified Work Program (UWP) in different ways. In Lubbock, the plan was originally established in conjunction with a 3 regulatory Policy Advisory Committee and a Technical Committee. Currently, within SDBPT District 5, headquartered in Lubbock: 1. The Technical Committee organizes the Transportation Improvement plan; 2. The Steering Committee, which consists of two representatives from Lubbock County, two from the City of Lubbock, two from the SDBPT, and several ex-officio members, and serves as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) by contract with the State of Texas, formalizes the TIP and UWP; 3. The Metropolitan Planning Organization contracts for services from the state to the county and local governments on UWP projects, and has .authority for minor changes to the DWP; 4. The Policy Advisory Committee, comprised of local, state, and federal elected officials, forwards both the TIP and UWP to the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation for official approval. After approval, the SDHPT forwards the plans to the FBWA. Volume One of the initial Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan (UTP), done in 1964, was updated by Volume 2 (1970) and Volume 3 (1974), and is replaced by this document, Volume 4 (1986). The objective of these updates is to develop a long range integrated transportation system which will meet Lubbock's traffic demands for twenty year periods. For several years, the Department of Transportation, through its modal administrations, has promoted the development of an annual Unified work Program (UWP) to describe intermodal, comprehensive transportation planning in each urbanized area. This single program was designed to be the basis for application of Federal transportation planning funds to each of the DOT modal administrations. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 and the surface Transportation Act of 1978 include provisions which place even more emphasis on the need for a unified transportation planning work 4 r i r r l r r ! r r r r ,- [ r ' r ,- t ! • ,- 1 I ,- 1 r I ! program. By providing Federal-Aid Urban System funds for highway improvements or for mass transportation at the local elected official's option, this act reinforces the need for a planning process which considers the needs of each area on an individual basis and then analyzes highway and mass transportation needs together. In addition, Section 112 of both highway acts provides planning funds which are to •be made available by the State• for comprehensive transportation planning. These Section 112 •pL• funds combined with Urban Mass Transportation Section 8 funds represent the Federal Assistance that should be included in a single unified program. This Unified Work Program has been developed to coordinate the various transportation planning functions of the City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, FHWA, UMTA, and FAA within Lubbock County. [Unified work Program for Transportation Planning, Lubbock Urbanized Area, FY 1986 (October 1, 1985-September 30, 1986)]. In addition to the OWP and OTP Update, a five year outline of priority projects, called the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), is developed. The TIP is then further subdivided into an Annual Element, the TIP/AE. The TIP/AE outlines program projects to be considered for implementation during the next fiscal year, and is reviewed for changes annually. All of these plans are designed to give full consideration to local needs, attitudes, and thinking on virtually all elements of transportation. The detail work, including collection of data projects and subsequent interpretation, is performed under procedures established by the National Committee on Urban Transportation. The primary method used to develop the Transportation Plan is computer 5 modeling that simulates innumerable hypothetical traffic systems using different given variables while utilizing actual population and land use characteristics of Lubbock. The Transportation Plan will establish Lubbock transportation needs based on the most efficient use of the present street system and analysis of cost factors related to proposed improvements and operating expenses. Factors other than anticipated traffic demand and cost are also considered, including: 1. Minimum interruption of neighborhoods; 2. Minimum disruption of schools, churches, and parks; 3. Minimum disruption of existing businesses1 4. Preservation of sites with historical or community value. The Transportation Plan for Lubbock emphasizes motor vehicles, as the private automobile remains the predominant mode of travel in the city. Although more use of mass transit will be desirable as Lubbock's population increases and gas costs increase, it is probable that private auto trips will constitute a majority of travel within the near future. Should the proportion of trips on mass transit facilities increase, the effect upon the recommended thoroughfare system would be minimal. As in transportation studies for other cities, the continuing usefulness and popularity of the private automobile is a fact. However, an emphasis toward development of alternate modes of transportation other than 6 r r \ i l r -l t ' ' r . ' r r r r \ r ' ' r r r r r ,- 1 -t ' the privately owned passenger vehicle are considered essential. The Transportation Plan provides a system of thoroughfare street and expressway facilities that will provide rea~onable standards of safety, speed, economy, and comfort in the context of both private and public transit. The Transportation Plan attempts to provide proper balance betwtrm upgrading the present system and adding new facilities throughout the forecast period. Capital improvements, including extensions of thoroughfare and expressway facilities and collector street extensions, will serve increasingly urbanized areas and population. Secondary (residential and alley) streets are provided as new areas are subdivided and platted. The Thoroughfare System Lubbock has been known for many years as the •sub City• of the South Plains since Lubbock serves as the major distribution and reception center for this geographic region. The location of Lubbock at the geographic center of the south Plains is also enhanced by the flat topography that eliminates many difficulties during construction and operation of an efficient transportation system. However, the pavement must be constructed to allow for the wide variations in Lubbock's temperature and relatively heavy traffic on streets and highways. As early as 1870, surveying had been done within Lubbock County, laying out square miles on a grid pattern. 7 The county road system established by both law and tradition easily fit into the grid system with major thoroughfares one mile apart. The grid pattern is uniform and efficient for local travel needs; however, the patterns do impose some difficulty during planning for new direct, diagonal routes. The grid system is also economical for land development, minimizing tracts and blocks with odd shapes and sizes. A few diagonal railroad and thoroughfare routes bisect the city, but these routes do not, for the most part, form barriers which break the city into isolated sections. Except for the Yellowhouse Canyon on the north and east, the city is mostly free from geographical constraints. Mobility and accessibility are essential to the healthy growth of all communities, such that transportation needs must be closely related to urban development as a whole. Land-use distribution governs the origin and destination of a major portion of vehicle trips; that is, where they will start and where they will terminate. The residence is the starting point in 801 of daily travel. Similarly, the destinations of many trips are controlled by location of employment, shopping facilities, cultural attractions, and recreation areas. In turn, proposed or actual location of these land-uses is dominated by transportation facilities. A cycle becomes apparent, but which comes first is not often evident. The Transportation Plan aids in bringing planned and efficient order to this relationship. 8 - r l r I r r I , r r l r r r r r r i r r t r r .,.. r ! l . r \. Lubbock's current Transportation Plan is based on a 1964 origin-destination study, subsequent updated data, and on current or anticipated land use trends. In 1985, a new computer model study provided the basis for updating the Thoroughfare Plan Hap. The analysis adopted as the basis for this volume is Assignment OS-OS-3R6, done in July, 1985. , This modeling is aided by the Planning Department's •serial zone study.• serialJone study Serial zones are geographic subdivisions of a city used by the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (SDHPT) to enter land use and population data into the Department's computer model. The computer model utilizes a city's transportation system and land use and population data compiled by serial zone to generate a distribution of trips between the zones along the transportation system. The transportation system can be modified infinitely and the computer model rerun any number of times to see the effect changes in the transportation system may have on the distribution of trips throughout the system. The steps in performing a serial zone study are: 1. Division of the city into serial zones by SDHPT 2. Compilation, by zones, of: a. b • c. Dwelling units Population Residential, Commercial, and Industrial acreage 9 d. Estimate of zonal income on a scale of 1-5 with •1• the lowest and •s• the highest e. Designation of any special trip generators such as malls, schools, factories, and churches 3. Data entry on forms provided by SDBPT and sent to Austin for entry into the computer With the adoption of the 1974 Comprehensive Land Use Plan and a 1975 Zoning Code update, zoning policy has shifted commercial development away from previous strip commercial development to nodal centers at major thoroughfare intersections. The plan proposes •strip commercial development shall be avoided. In newly developing residential areas, 5 to 10 acres of local retail commercial use will be allowed on each corner at the intersection of major thoroughfares, serving neighborhoods within 1/2 to l mile radius.• (1983 Comprehensive Plan) These nodal centers provide better access to the businesses within the nodes, safer off-street parking, and improve the function of streets as vehicle carriers. Strip development places through-traffic in direct conflict with persons entering and leaving businesses along the thoroughfare. Highways Numerous state and/or federal highways are located in Lubbock County. Loop 289 intersects these highways and acts as an outer connecting link around the City. At present Lubbock is served by Interstate 27, a ninety mile expressway under construction between Lubbock and 10 r ' L • r r r r I \ . r l . r r r r I ' r r r ,... l r ,- I r- 1 r 1 r ' Amarillo, where it will join the east-west Interstate 40. In the future, this Interstate is proposed to extend south and link the south Plains with the rest of the state's Interstate highway system. Other federal highways include: the north/south u.s. 87 (combined with I-27 between Lubbock and Amarillo) and on southward to Tahoka and Midland; the east/west u.s. 62/82 combination which serves Brownfield and Hobbs to the southwest and Crosbyton to Wichita Falls to the east; and the southeast/northwest u.s. 84 which goes to Clovis to the northwest and Post/Slaton/Sweetwater (I-20) to the southeast. A four-lane divided highway has been proposed to link Lubbock with the Dallas-Fort Worth area along u.s. 82 and Texas 199 and 114. This would connect Lubbock directly with the DFW area. Building of this four-lane highway will increase the effectiveness of Lubbock as a distribution/reception center to the South Plains, and facilitate vehicular travel for the student enrollment of Texas Tech University that comes from the Metroplex. The need for this highway has been detailed in a presentation to the Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation entitled •Recommendation for 4-lane Divided Bighway--Lubbock to Dallas•, compiled in April of 1972, by the Highway Committee of the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce. Endorsements from involved and interested cities, counties, and chambers of commerce along the route are included. 11 In addition to these highways, five farm-to-market. roads and 25 county roads complete access from all directions of the South Plains to Lubbock. These roads form a network that services a 26 county retail and 54 county wholesale trade area in three states. Interstate 27 Project The proposed extension of Interstate 27 will include the development of a controlled access highway from 0.2 miles south of North Loop 289 to 0.4 miles south of South Loop 289. The length is approximately 6.3 miles and will require a minimum 400 feet of right of way with additional widths at interchanges. The entire project lies within the city limits of Lubbock. (Page 8-10, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1979) The approved design specifies a six lane, controlled access facility with frontage roads along most of its length. Interchanges have been approved at Municipal Drive, 4th Street, 13th Street, 19th Street, 34th Street, 50th Street, and the Tahoka Traffic Circle. Preliminary plans indicate the main lanes of the Interstate will be elevated from just north of the Yellowhouse Canyon to 38th Street and will be below grade from 38th Street to South Loop 289. Three railroad grade separations are also proposed. The extension of Interstate 27 through Lubbock will provide a continuous controlled access highway from Interstate 40 in Amarillo to south Loop 289 in Lubbock. It 12 r i ' r l r 1 ' r 1 r- t r- t r r r r r l r l . r ' , r r I ' r I ! . ,.. ' I r will serve interstate traffic through connections with numerous highways north from Amarillo and south from Lubbock, as well as serving regional traffic within the Texas Panhandle. The frontage road system will enhance local traffic circulation and provide good access for existing and future land uses. (Page 4, u.s. Department of Transportation, 1979). The project will vastly improve accessibility to the Lubbock Central Business District, and will be a factor in the geographical distribution of future growth and development within the city, allowing urbanization to continue in accordance with the Lubbock Comprehensive Plan. (I-27 Corridor Land Use Plan, February, 1985, pp. 13-14) 2. 3. 4. 5. l. Transportation-related activities in and around Lubbock will benefit from the extension of Interstate 27 in terms of reduced travel time, reduced congestion, improved safety, and energy savings. tinterst-ilt~_27_Jn_tb§SitLof Lubbock, 1979, p. 24) Reduce travel time for trips between the Central Business District and outlying areas of the city and will be a positive step toward revitalization of Lubbock's Central Business District. (Urban Renewal Agency, Lubbock, Texas, 1975, p. 23) Mobility offered by Interstate 27 will increase the effective trade area of sites located in the corridor, providing further development incentives. (Interstn§ 2Lln....tb~_Cfu_9f Lubbock, 1979, pp. 25-28) Increased land values, which improve the tax base and provide incentive to fill in vacant parcels near the corridor. (Planning Department, Lubbock, Texas, 1983) Replacement of Tahoka Traffic Circle with a three level interchange, reducing delay and increasing traffic 13 safety. (City of Lubbock et. al., Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan, 1975, p. 89) Potentipl_D.i.flildyantages of Inte.nitate 27 1. 2. 3. Displacement of families and businesses within proposed IB-27 right of way. IB-27 perceived as a •barrier• between neighborhoods. Initially, a small reduction in tax base due to loss of 265 acres of privately owned land being converted to right of way. (All, strategies for Responsible Growth. Jnterstot~_11_t.Qrria~and uae_study, 1986) Brownfielil-89§9/3rd--4th street Freeway corridor study As a segment of the current Unified Work Program, a Brownfield Road/3rd Street -4th Street corridor study is in progress. This study, conducted by the engineering firm of Henningson, Durham and Richardson, Incorporated, will examine alternatives for upgrading Brownfield Road to freeway status and connecting it to Interstate 27 within the 3rd Street/4th Street corridor. Revisions to the interchange at Brownfield Road and West Loop 289 and grade separations along the entire corridor will be considered. Special attention will be given to right of way through Texas Tech University, and to University concerns about vehicular and pedestrian movement across the freeway corridor. As a part of this focus~ on March 13, 1986, the Lubbock City Council and the Texas Tech University Board of Regents agreed on the concept of below-grade mainlanes through the Tech campus as part of a freeway linking Interstate 27 and southwest Loop 289. 14 ,... i ' r l r I i [ ' r l r ~ I . r r r r I . r r r r i I , r ~ I i Tentative plans call for the proposed freeway to begin at southwest Loop 289 and proceed northeast along the Brownfield Road/Tech Freeway corridor to 4th Street. From there the route will be in the 3rd and 4th Street corridor and connect with Interstate 27 north of downtown Lubbock. A major interchange will be constructed at the intersection of Brownfield Road and 19th Street. Access roads and grade separations will be provided as needed along the length of the freeway. Access in the Texas Tech area will include exits to Jones Stadium and Indiana Avenue. On May 28, 1986, the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation Commission approved environmental impact studies and preliminary design studies to lead to identification of right of way necessary for development of the freeway. Byron Blaschke, deputy director of the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, said the recommendation calls for the proposed route to be designated a controlled access highway from southwest Loop 289 to Avenue Q. The environmental studies include identification of alternatives and an extensive public involvement process, which must include public hearings. (Lubbock Ayalanche- Journal, May 25, 1986). Total project costs will be approximately $137.5 million: $26.7 million for right of way and $110.8 million for construction. Mel Pope, District 5 state Department of Highways and Public Trafisportation District Engineer, estimates two to three years for completion of the environmental impact 15 studies and engineering design work. The environmental assessment will include a series of public hearings to determine such factors as noise, pollution and effect on substrata water tables. Acquisition of right of way will take two to three years after the environmental studies are completed. Some construction could begin in the Texas Tech area in three to four years, with the entire project taking as long as ten years to complete. (Lubbock AvalaQche- Journ~l, May 29, 1986) Qut~r_L.Q.QP on June 25, 1986, the Commission of the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation approved a feasibility study for the designation of an Outer Loop in Lubbock County. Initial suggestions are that the Outer Loop follow the existing routes of F.M. 1585, F.M. 179, F.M. 2641, and F.M. 1729/835, as they intersect, except for a short segment southwest of Lubbock where it would bypass the City of Wolfforth. Although no funds were authorized for right of way acquisition or construction, the Commission action is the necessary initial step for this project. (Lubbock EveoJ.119. Js;;•.Y.U~i!l, June 26, July 8, 1986) An Outer Loop in the above locat:i.ori bas been indicated as a part of the proposed transportation network for Lubbock County on both the 1983 and 1986 Comprehensive Land use Plan Updates. 16 r I . r r r ,- r t ,- r ,... r l . ,... l r r r t . r r r f i ,- ,... POPULATION, LAND USE, AND ECONOMICS As of January 1, 1986, the population estimate for the City of Lubbock was 188,283. This is an increase of 14,304 over the 1980 population of 173,979 and an increase of 39,182 over the 1970 population of 149,101. Lubbock is expected to sustain a steady growth rate over the next 25 years with a projected population of over 240,000 for the year 2005. Agriculture remains a dominant economic activity in the Lubbock region, while the City of Lubbock is the regional trade, distribution, medical, and educational center for the South Plains area of West Texas and Eastern New Mexico. Major manufacturing in Lubbock has been and remains oriented toward agricultural markets. continued sun Belt Growth Texas and Southwest United States growth is expected to continue to be strong through 1990. Current sources reflect a belief that the Sunbelt migration will level off between 1990 and 2000. Lubbock will share in this growth. ~exas ~ecb Growth and Impacts The student population at Texas Tech University is projected to remain stable between 23,000 and 24,000 to 1990. While the World War II •baby boom• generation has passed through college years, the student population is 17 projected to remain stable because of continued population growth, additional new university programs such as the Nursing School and continued growth of the Texas Tech Health Sciences Center. Texas Tech University also contributes to the cultural and economic development of Lubbock through continuing education programs, business seminars, legal education, agricultural research, numerous cultural events and programs, sports events, and specialized programs including the Textile Research Center and the International Center for Arid and Semi-Arid Land Studies. Reese Air for~e ~. Reese Air Force Base has a significant impact on the Lubbock economy, supplying consumers, market, and employment opportunities. The Air Force Base has been a stable influence with little fluctuation of personnel since 1970. The training mission and manning levels are expected to remain unchanged for the immediate future. Lubbock's industrial base is projected to expand and diversify over the next 25 years. The presence of Reese Air Force Base and several institutions of higher education as a source of trained labor make Lubbock particularly attractive to high technology industries. 18 r r ' . r r-1 . t . r r t r- 1 ! r ( r r r r-i r l r r . r I I, r I WholesalinsJ.ng_HeLehousing center Lubbock's centralized location and excellent transportation facilities have established it as a strong and growing warehousing and wholesaling distribution center. The wholesale trade area covers over 63,500 square miles and serves a population of over one million persons, re- confirming Lubbock's position as the •aub of the Plains.• Regiona1_seryices_~n~~1 Equally important for balanced growth is Lubbock's regional positjon as a commercial, financial, education, medical, and cultural center. Lubbock has expanded steadily in recent years as a center for services, and is expected to continue this trend in the future. LAND USE AS OF JULY, 1985 1973 1983 Residential 13.5 sq.mi. 16.0 sq.mi. Commercial* 4.5 4.0 Industrial 2.5 3.5 ROW/P.U. 23.0 30.0 vacanL ______ Js .. ,0 _________ J..8..__5 __ _ Total 82.5 92.0 1985 19.4 sq.mi. 4.6 4.2 28.4 _ ____ ,41...L _______ - 104.0 Source: 1973 and 1983, Lubbock Comprehensive Land Use Plan; 1985, Lubbock Planning Department estimates. *The method of determination changed between 1973 and 1983. Formal recognition of the value of quality urban design for the City of Lubbock began as early as 1969. In Goals fQ.[__t~-S~Y~nti~e, the improvement of urban design and 19 the elimination of •unsightly exterior appearances and inappropriate uses of property within the city• were recommended as ways to improve Lubbock's urban image as well as stabilize and improve property values. A continuing effort to develop a partnership between the public and private sectors is imperative for improving the quality of urban design in Lubbock. Design excellence, sound construction, and appropriate uses of property within Lubbock are necessary for increased and stable property values as well as aesthetic considerations. As stated in Goals for the seventies, •the city itself must be our finest work of art.• The 1974 Lubbock Comprehensive Plan contained land use development policies to accomplish these goals. These policies serve as guidelines in the development of the Lubbock urban Area. They are included in the Lubbock comprehe~ive flan, Land use Update, 1983; streets: 1. Thoroughfares should be placed on section lines. 2. Collector streets should be on half-section lines. 3. For traffic safety, minor streets should intersect all other streets in a •T• rather than four-way intersection. 4. Multiple driveway openings should be avoided, and no driveway access to low or medium density residential development should be allowed on thoroughfares. Residential Developments: 1. Residential lots should not front on thoroughfare or collector streets. 2. A medium density (duplex) residential development should be used as a buffer. between a single family 20 ,.. ,- ! ,.. t t ,- [ ,-. r l ,- l . r r r r I r r t r I r r r r ' ,_ ' 3. 4. s. 6. 7. 8. development and a high density residential and/or commercial development. High density residential development should be near a thoroughfare so that its traffic flows directly onto the thoroughfare rather than through lower density residential development. A maximum population ratio of 8,000 to 10,000 people per square mile should be established by City officials and staff through consideration of the traffic handling capabilities of adjacent streets and the service capabilities of utilities. A low or medium density residential lot should face across the street to the front rather than the side of another residential lot. Large concentrations of high density residential developments should be avoided so that traffic congestion is reduced to a minimum on adjacent streets. Factors including topography, aesthetics, and flow should be considered in the design of a residential street system. The grid pattern should be avoided where possible within neighborhoods. Various techniques in street alignment should be employed to lessen the use of local residential streets by non-local traffic. commercial and Industrial Develppment: 1. Strip commercial development shall be avoided. 2. 3. 4. In newly developing residential areas, 5 to 10 acres of local retail commercial use will be allowed on each corner at the intersection of major thoroughfares, serving neighborhoods within 1/2 to 1 mile radius. Commercial development which extends past 660' from the intersection of major thoroughfares shall be considered to have made the transition from cluster development to strip development. Commercial land uses which serve a city-wide or regional market shall be located on regional arterials. 21 s. A small neighborhood shopping area may be permitted at the center of a square mile of residential development with proper site planning. 6. Where the possibility exists for adverse effects on adjacent residential areas, commercial or industrial development may take place only in accordance with a site plan approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. 7. Industrial or commercial zoning adjacent to Loop 289, I-27, and major entry corridors to the City should be granted only in accordance.with a site plan submitted to and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Public Facilitiess 1. Residential developers should plan for one elementary school site and at least one neighborhood park site in each square mile of residential development. 2. Playa lakes should be viewed as a source of aesthetic amenity, whether privately or publicly maintained. 3. Churches should be placed near collector and/or major thoroughfare street facilities. Growth frends The majority of expansion in Lubbock during the past thirty years has taken place in south, southwest, and west Lubbock. There is no evidence that a continuing trend for growth in these directions will cease in the near future. It is expected that these areas will develop within existing policies as residential, buffered by medium density activities, with nodal commercial development, and little industrial development. This development will place increased demands on the thoroughfare system of the city, particularly in the high growth areas. 22 ~ I i . r ~ I l ~ I r t . r l . r r r ~ I i r r l . r l r r r r MAJOR '.l'RARSPORTATION FACILITIES Bus Facilities Intercity bus passenger service is provided in Lubbock by the Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma Coaches, Inc. The volume of passenger service has fluctuated over the last few years, but has averaged 236,000 passengers per year for the last five years. The amount of freight hauled by the bus line has averaged 11,300,000 packages per year over the last five years. Terminal and parking space is ample, and access on the existing street system is good. Railroad Facilit...ill The City of Lubbock is presently served by two railway lines, the Burlington-Northern, Inc. (old Fort Worth and Denver) and the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway Company. Both railways have adequate freight terminals for present and anticipated needs. Neither railway provides passenger service. A great deal of freight hauled from this area by the railway systems is in the form of agricultural goods. From Lubbock, the Santa Fe Railway system provides direct freight service to Dallas-Ft. Worth, southeast to Houston and Galveston, north to Amarillo, Denver, Kansas City, and Chicago, and northwest to Clovis, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. The Burlington-Northern Railroad provides 23 service to Dallas and Ft. Worth and other points southeast, and to Amarillo and Denver to the north. Within the Lubbock area specifically, both the Santa Fe and the Burlington Northern have steadily expanded their freight terminal facilities in and around Lubbock as demand for service increases. Both lines have purchased acreage, installed spurs, and are selling or leasing sites to industry. Much of the heavy industry in the City is located adjacent to railroad spurs. Motor freight service is provided by twenty common carrier trucking companies. In addition to the common carriers, there are also specialized haulers, including heavy haulers, liquid and dry bulk haulers, local cartage, and refrigerated haulers. An area of concern for transportation planning has been truck docking facilities along Avenue A, between 19th Street and 34th Street. A lack of setback from Avenue A creates conflicts between backing and parked trucks and through traffic. Parking restrictions and police patrol for flagrant violations remain the best available solution for congestion problems. Since most of the motor freight carrier terminals are located near or along the route of Interstate 27, a great amount of local traffic will be reduced when the Interstate is completed. A majority are located between Broadway and 24 r i I . r i ' r r ' ,.. ' I ! r i . . r r r r r r t . r l r I r r I r r l 50th Street and between Avenue Land Quirt Avenue. outlying terminals include one on Clovis Road between Detroit Avenue and Indiana Avenue, one on 34th Street west of Slide Road, and one west of Avenue A on 70th Street. The Lubbock City Council accepted the first Master Plan for the Lubbock Airport in 1967. The Master Plan outlined improvements and construction needs with guidelines for the expansion of facilities and service. Construction on a series of these improvements began in 1970. The most recent Master Plan was completed in December 1980. The facilities constructed to date at Lubbock International include a new terminal building, air cargo facilities, runway extensions, holding apron, a fire and crash station and taxiways, and additional land has been acquired. Since an expansion and renovation completed in 1986, the terminal building has approximately 221,000 square feet of floor area on three levels. All nine of the second level boarding gates and lounges are equipped with boarding bridges. Space for airline ticketing and operations has been expanded, and more baggage claim, public use, and airport tenant areas added. This construction, funded by bond money approved by the voters in 1982, will allow Lubbock to attract and secure the necessary flights needed for a growing metropolitan area. 25 The apron expansion completed in 1986 adds four aircraft parking positions and room for better traffic flow during congested periods of operation. In addition, space will be available for overflow aircraft parking. Unlike the terminal expansion, the cost of this construction is being financed 90 percent by federal funds. Both projects are designed to meet the growing needs of airport patrons and the aviation industry serving Lubbock. The apron level of the terminal contains airline operations, kitchen service, air cargo, baggage handling, storage, and mechanical space. The second or main level provides ground access for passengers, airlines ticket offices, restaurant, concession and gift shop, baggage claim, auto rental, and passenger boarding lounges and gates. The third floor is office and meeting space for the airport administration, press rooms, and club/lounge areas. The airport automobile parking facility has both long term and short term parking and both covered and open air spaces. The present parking capacity is 1810 spaces, including the two-level covered parking structure with 702 spaces. This includes 1,570 public spaces, 158 employee spaces, and .81 rental car spaces. The present runway system consists of: l 11,500 foot north/south, all weather runway operated under an Instrument Landing System controlled by F.A.A. radar. 1 8,000 foot, east/west, cross wind runway. 1 2,800 foot, north/south runway. 26 i . ' r ' r r r t ,,. I t . r r • r r ! . r I ! r i : r r I . r I . r . . r r In addition to general aviation facilities at Lubbock International Airport, Lubbock is served by Town and Country Airpark. Located south of the city, it provides landing facilities for private planes and hangar and repair service for individual airplane owners. 27 TABLE 1-A LUBBOCK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PASSENGER BOARDING COMPARISON BY AIRLINE DECEMBER 1984 AND 1985 AIRLINER SOUTHWEST AMERICAN DELTA ASPEN DECEMBER, 1984 29,599 9,699 7,623 773 DECEMBER, 1985 26,127 11,566 8,175 1,208 DECEMBER 1980 TO DECEMBER 1985 PERCENTAGE INCREASE N 01) AMARILLO MIDLAND-ODESSA LUBBOCK TABLE 1-B 1985 BOARDINGS AT AREA AIRPORTS DECEMBER BOARDINGS 38,257 53,467 47,076 TOTAL BOARDINGS 441,262 643,198 565,093 % CHANGE OVER PREVIOUS YEAR -11.71 +19.21 +7.21 +56.31 24.01 TABLE 2 LUBBOCK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AIRLINES PASSENGER BOARDING SUMMARY 1980 -1985 AIRLINES 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 ' CHANGE 1984 TO 1985 BRANIFF 100,217 131,958 48,540 0% *CONTINENTAL 76,915 54,924 50,124 28,299 0% SOUTHWEST 271,577 252,156 282,469 281,621 361,189 357,231 -1.1, AMERICAN 31,239 96,596 103,837 111,100 114,875 +3.41 DELTA .25,405 56,464 82,704 80,829 -2.3% OTHER 7 ,.316 4,323 2,737 43,259 20,783 12,158 -41.51 h) BOARDINGS THROUGH '° DECEMBER 455,925 474,600 505,871 513,480 575,776 565,093 I INCREASE OVER PREVIOUS YEAR -7.01 +4.0% +6.6% +1.5% +12.1, -1.91 DECEMBER TOTALS, 1980-1985 DECEMBER 38,691 44,549 42,270 47,105 47,694 47,076 I INCREASE OVER PREVIOUS YEAR -0.91 +15.1% -5.11 +11.51 +1.3% -1.31 YEARLY TOTALS, 1980-1985 YEARLY TOTAL 455,925 474,600 505,871 513,480 575,776 565,093 % INCREASE OVER PREVIOUS YEAR -7.0% +4.01 +6.61 +1.51 +12.1, -1.91 * E NTERNATIONAT •. Transit system The City of Lubbock has adopted a mission regarding transit services. This mission is: To insure that public transit has the greatest positive impact on the economic and social vitality of the City of Lubbock, while maintaining the lowest possible charges to direct customers and the lowest possible need for taxpayer support. (LT Form 3.0, City of Lubbock Annual Budget, 1985-1986) Continuing service through planning and route refinements should achieve this goal. The current transit system in Lubbock, Citibus, initiated service on December 6, 1976. The system is managed by a private firm, with the City of Lubbock retaining ownership and budgetary control. Prior to 1976, the service was privately owned and operated. The City of Lubbock began subsidizing the private system in 1971. Organizationally, the transit system is within the Transportation Division of the City of Lubbock. Management services are currently provided by McDonald Transit Associates, Inc., the third private transit management firm to perform the function since Citibus became a City operation. Services provided by Citibus include fixed routes, demand-responsive service for the handicapped and elderly, a shuttle system for Texas Tech University, subscription service, and incidental charters. To provide these services, the rolling stock inventory consists of: 30 r ; ,- i ' r r r t . r r r- 1 l r r ,- 1 t r - r ,- 1 r-l 18 16 2 3 2 1980 GMC RTS-03 37-passenger coaches, with wheelchair lifts 1982 GMC RTS-04 39 passenger coaches 1976 21-passenger Grumman passenger coaches 1984 9-passenger Ford vans, with wheelchair lifts 1986 Champion vans, with wheelchair lifts and special interior equipment for wheelchairs Citibus provides service based on traditional patterns whereby the routes radiate from a central location in the downtown area. There is a modified grid pattern to the southwest. Most buses stop at the downtown central transfer center at the Broadway and Texas Avenue intersection. The South Plains Mall is a secondary transfer center. For the most part, service is provided on 30 minute intervals, meaning that a bus will pass a bus stop in one or both directions every 30 minutes. Currently, transit service is provided over twelve routes. Tables 3 and 4 present the weekday and Saturday operation statistics for these routes. The network described in Table 5 shows that the system requires 17 buses during a peak period. (Statistics were provided by Sylvester Cantu, Administrative Assistant, Transit, May 1985, and John Wilson, Transit Coordinator, August 1986). The routes provide service to most major generators and the majority of the residential area inside Loop 289. Major generators for the system include the downtown area, Texas Tech University, most hospitals, South Plains Mall, several secondary public schools, and the minority residential areas 31 served by the system. Service is provided to within one- quarter mile for 59 percent of the City population. Ridership for Citibus scheduled routes reached a record of over one million passengers during 1985, and is ahead of last year in the first quarter of 1986. Demand-response ridership doubled in 1985, to around 25,000 passengers. A ridership history of Citibus is presented on Table 6. In brief, the total annual ridership of the system is a function of the level of service available, with some impact ' from economic factors such as the price of gasoline and unemployment. Tables 7 and 8 present ridership characteristics and demographics for each route of the system. The contributions of the transit system include: Individual savings in auto operating costs and auto parking fees. Reduced vehicle emissions. Essential mobility for families and/or individuals without a car or with only one car. Improved community fuel efficiency contributing to reduced national dependency on foreign oil. The expansion of Citibus routes will be based on a development program which considers the following factors in identifying transit service areas for Lubbock: Performance of current system (Routes) Lubbock growth patterns and demographics Transit generators Traffic circulation patterns 32 r ' ! . ' r ,.. l . r r 1 I r r r . ' r r r -f I . ' r : r r ~. , r I ' ,- I ! t -I l r ''fi l '" Citizen service requests Ridership origin/designation and demographic studies Other public input such as Lubbock1 2005, Planning Program, and Lubbock's CDBG Surveys The service expansion methodology of Citibus is to identify areas and/or corridors (transit service areas) of Lubbock which exhibit the strongest potential for sustaining service. Funding will impact the level of service expansion for the future. Citibus is a conventional bus service for meeting public transportation needs. Future transportation needs may require less conventional techniques of service delivery. Innovative means of delivering service should not be overlooked, and may include: Longer hours of operation. seasonal service increases (such as longer hours of operation during the Christmas shopping season). Express routes (routes that travel partially on expressways with fewer stops over longer distances.) Special services (such as route deviations which provide more convenient service to affected groups.) Demand/response feeder service into the regular route system as an alternative to scheduled service to low volume areas. 33 TABLE 3 CITIBUS FIXED ROUTE OPERATING STATISTICS WEEKDAY SERVICE APRIL, 1985 Service Service Round Daily Daily Route Begins Ends Trips Miles Hours speed 1 5:45am 7:15pm 27 183.6 13.50 13.6 2 5:45am 7:15pm 27 224.7 13.50 16.6 3 6:15am 7:15pm 25 385.0 25.00 15.4 5 6:15am 7:15pm 23 393.3 26.83 14.7 6 6:45am 6:15pm 23 160.0 11.50 13.8 7 6:15am 6:05pm 24 112.0 8.33 14.1 8 6:15am 6:45pm 25 185.0 12.50 14.8 9 6:45am 6:45pm 24 216.0 12.00 18.0 12 6:15am 7:15pm 21 493.5 31.50 15.7 13 n/a n/a 3 32.4 2.42 13.1 14 6:15am 7:15pm 26 187.2 13.00 14.4 15 6.15am 6:45pm 20 292.0 20.00 14.6 System 5:45am 7:15pm 268 2865.5 190.08 15.l 34 r r L-. r r r ' r r i ' r r r r r ! ' r r I . I j CITIBUS Service Route Begins 1 6145am 2 6:45am 3 7:15am 5 8:35am 6 10:45am 7 7:15am 8 6:45am 9 7:45am 12 9:15am 14 6:45am 15 8:15am System 6:45am TABLE 4 FIXED ROUTE OPERATING STATISTICS SATURDAY SERVICE APRIL, 1985 Service Round Daily Daily Ends Trips Miles Hours Speed 6:45pm 24 163.2 12.0 13.6 6:45pm 24 199.2 12.0 16.6 7:15pm 22 338.8 22.0 ·15.4 7:15pm 20 342.0 23.33 14.7 6:15pm 17 177.3 8.5 13.8 6:05pm 22 103.4 7.67 14.1 6:15pm 23 170.2 11.5 14.8 6:15pm 21 189.0 10.5 18.0 7:15pm 15 352.5 22.5 15.67 6:45pm 24 172.8 12.0 14.4 6:45pm 15 219.0 15.0 14.6 7:15pm 227 2367.4 157.0 15.1 35 TABLE 5 CITIBOS CURRENT OPERATIONAL HOOKUPS AND PEAK BOOR BOS REQUIREMENTS APRIL, 1985 HOOKUP NUMBER ROU'l'ES 1 1, 12 2 2,3,14,15 3 5,7 4 6,8 5 9 6 13 TOTAL 36 I OF PEAR BUSES 4 6 3 2 1 1 17 r r r l , ,- I I""' l r r r l . r r r r r r r r I ' r TABLE 6 CITIBUS FIXED ROUTE RIDERSHIP HISTORICAL PROFILE 1972 -1986 YEAR RIDERSHIP FY 1972-73 364,723 FY 1973-74 378,300 FY 1974-75 451,250 FY 1975-76 554,821 FY 1977-78 722,267 FY 1978-79 763,949 FY 1979-80 958,998 FY 1980-81 933,026 FY 1981-82 945,473 FY 1982-83 870,237 FY 1983-84 886,485 FY 1984-85 989,269 FY 1985-86 989,800* *Estimated Ridership. 37 TABLE 7 CITIBUS FIXED RCl11'E RIDERSHIP AND DEMXmAPHIC ANALYSIS APRIL 1985 - % of Ridership by Fare category Load Rt.Pass/Hr Adult Eco. stu. S/H Tick. Trans. Peak Hour Factor 1 24.1 32.4 10.7 3.1 11.3 5.5 28.4 7:1S-8:lSAM 0.603 2 22.5 36.2 10.7 2.6 8.2 6.9 28.3 6:4S-7:45AM 0.551 3 18.7 27.7 19.0 12.2 8.5 3.2 26.0 3:1S-4:lSPM 0.641 5 12.7 31.3 14.0 16.4 16.4 3.5 16.1 6z4S-7z45AM 0.321 6 24.7 21.5 7.0 1.8 · 12. 7 11.3 39.1 2:4S-3:45PM 0.692 7 22.1 31.5 9.1 3.3 9.2 6.5 26.1 7:1S-8zl5AM 0.321 8 19.6 35.1 9.8 2.4 13.1 6.1 24.9 2:4S-3z45PM 0.346 9 19.8 24.4 8.4 3.8 9.2 8.5 42.9 7:15-8:lSAM 0.333 12 12.4 35.2 13.6 8.5 6.4 3.9 26.7 3:1S-4:lSPM 0.410 13 13.7 24.2 9.1 3.0 18.2 12.1 30.3 NA NA 14 26.8 31.5 12.3 3.2 6.9 3.7 29.8 7:1S-8:lSAM 0.667 15 13.6 32.7 13.2 5.9 12.5 2.2 26.8 7:15-8:lSAM 0.282 Sys 18.1 31.5 12.5 6.3 10.3 5.6 28.0 7:1S-8:lSAM 0.496 38 r r ! l r TABLE 8 r • CITIBUS RIDERSHIP DEM:GRAPHICS BY PEICEN.rAGE ,- l JANUARY 1985 r Under Fran Under W/0 Auto Rides ! Rt. Fem. Wh. Blk. Bis. 18 18-61 $12K Y at Bane Daily 1 54.8 2.7 92.5 4.1 15.8 76.0 80.1 34.2 63.7 r 2 66.7 10.5 77.4 12.1 4.8 78.2 75.8 39.5 72.6 l r 3 50.2 38.6 39.8 16.9 8.4 77.5 63.1 37.3 69.5 l 5 48.1 62.4 24.1 10.5 9.0 87.2 54.1 22.6 54.1 r 6 46.6 11.0 52.1 34.2 13.7 so.a 72.6 43.8 57.5 7 47.1 9.8 49.0 39.2 21.6 70.6 82.4 41.2 74.5 r 8 52.1 19.2 30.1 47.9 2.7 86.3 82.2 41.1 64.4 ,-9 64.0 24.0 48.0 24.0 12.0 78.0 78.0 32 62.0 ! I . 12 57.0 38.2 44.0 14.5 10.1 78.3 74.4 31.4 68.0 ,,.... 13 42.9 42.9 42.9 14.2 o.o 100.0 85.7 71.4 100.0 [ 14 65.2 5.2 83.7 10.4 4.4 83.7 86.7 32.6 68.1 r l 15 53.9 42.1 39.3 13.2 19.1 65.1 61.8 33.6 75.0 r Sys 51.6 27.7 52.7 16.7 11.3 78.2 80.l 34.7 67.1 i r [ r r r I 39 r t r-l . TRAFFIC CONTROL ARD REGULATION curb Parking The restriction of on-street parking is one of the easiest and least expensive methods of increasing the capacity of existing streets, often by as much as fifty percent. In addition, elimination of curb parking may lower the accident rate, since the maneuvers involved in parking often result in accidents and congestion. Parking restrictions are used to give drivers better sight distance at intersections and other points of traffic concentration. curb parking may be restricted in other areas for various special uses such as taxi zones, bus zones, loading zones, and fire lanes. Curb parking in Lubbock is controlled by three types of regulatory measures: 1) Time Limit Parking, 2) No Parking During Specified Hours, and 3) No Parking At Any Time. Whenever on-street parking is permitted, the manner of parking is important. Because head-in or angle parking is considerably more hazardous than parallel parking, the former is not recommended and is being eliminated when possible. The following recommendations about on-street parking are excerpted from Parking Principle§ (1981): Arranging parking at an angle to the curb accomplishes more parking per unit of curb length than parallel parking. This apparent advantage becomss greater as the angle becomes greater, until at 90 almost 2.5 time as many spaces are available compared with parallel parking. Unfortunately, as 40 - r l r I r ,.... I • r ' I -1 ,.... L r r r r r r r r r r I i -i I. . r the angle increases, so does the need for greater amounts of roadway for maneuvering and so does the hazard of starting, stopping, and turning in streams of moving traffic. As a result, the •apparent• advantage of angle parking disappears when considering the combined disadvantage of interference and hazard along the street. The .principle hazard in angle parking is the lack of adequate visibility for the driver during the back-out maneuver. A second hazard results from the driver who stops suddenly when he sees a vehicle ahead in the process of backing out. Because empty parking stalls are difficult to perceive with angle parking, a third hazard results from motorists who are seeking a place to park. They must either proceed slowly (thus tying up traffic) in order to see the empty stall or slow abruptly when they come upon an empty space. Originally, when operating speeds and traffic volumes were low, angle parking work satisfactorily. But with today's fast-moving concentrations of traffic, angle parking is an unsafe anachronism that should be eliminated as rapidly as possible. Since the primary function of major thoroughfares and highways is to move traffic, on-street parking should be considered as a secondary use, and prohibited when it interferes with traffic safety or movement. Parking on the street is not provided in the design of new thoroughfares in Lubbock today. central Business District Parking Volume 2 of the Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan (1964) concluded that parking space in the Central Business District (CBD) was not a serious problem. Although a study was conducted in the 1960's to determine how to provide additional parking for the CBD if needed, the anticipated business increase did not develop and parking did not become 41 a problem. The trend toward decentralization of businesses in the city continues, and retail establishments continue to move to shopping centers outside the CBD and close their downtown operations. Parking meters were removed entirely from Lubbock streets in 1965. Presently, a majority of the core downtown on-street parking spaces are regulated for various parking durations from thirty minutes to two hours. The number of off-street parking spaces in'the CBD for remaining businesses continues to increase as older buildings are demolished and the property is converted to parking lots. Most major traffic generators provide parking lots for patrons. Two large public parking generators, the main u.s. Post Office and the Lubbock Municipal Building, have relocated to the perimeter of the CBD and have adequate off-street parking. The City of Lubbock provides off-street parking lots in three different blocks for city-owned vehicles and for the public while conducting business at the Municipal Square Building. Lubbock County has substantial areas of off-street parking east and south of the courthouse. The Memorial Civic Center, which was designated after the 1970 tornado, includes 12 blocks of the downtown area extending from Avenue K to Avenue O and from 7th Street to 10th Street. The number of public and privat~ parking spaces provided in this area further increases the total number of spaces available in the designated CBD area. 42 r r r \ r ' ' r-1 ' ; ... i ' \ -1 r r ; ' ,- ! r r r. \ r ' ' . r- 1 L r r r 1 ' ' r No new major public or private parking facilities have been constructed since the mid-1970's. In view of.modest increases in the supply of parking spaces and the low rate of increase of traffic volume, there seems to be no immediate need for additional major off-street parking facilities in the CBD. Traffip tontrol The continued use of traffic control measures and devices along with proper maintenance to insure their effectiveness are necessary to provide for future traffic. For the installation and revision of all traffic control devices, the uniform standards that have been established by the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways should be used. The Traffic Engineering Department of the City of Lubbock and the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation are responsible for recommending and applying those measures which will afford the maximum use, safety, and efficiency of the street and highway system. The following materials are recapped from Volume 2 of the Lubbock urban Transportation Application of the proper measures in the right places will enable each street to better perform its primary purpose. The control devices and measures should be geared to the specific needs of the various classes of streets, expressways, major arterials, collectors, and local streets. 43 Any street system should be operated to permit reasonable speeds and at the same time afford adequate safety. Regulatory control measures are techniques applied to improve traffic flow, but they necessarily mean imposition of some limitation upon complete freedom of movement. Whether these limitations take the form of speed zones, one way streets, parking restrictions, channelization, or any one of a number of other regulations, they are imposed as necessary restrictions on the free movement of the individual in order to benefit the majority. Such measurements are effective only in the presence of rigid enforcement. The construction of expressways should not be considered as the complete answer for proper traffic movement and circulation or for the relief of traffic congestion within an urban area, but only as a part of a balanced street system. To accommodate increased traffic volumes, adequate major thoroughfare and collector streets will always be required for the convenient distribution of traffic to destinations within the urban area. It is essential that these streets be used to their maximum capacity and efficiency if traffic congestion is to be kept to a minimum. Exhibits 1-3 show construction, function, and design standards for streets in the City of Lubbock. 44 r-I ! . r i r-t ,- r l r r I r l r r .,,_ r l r ) r r r r r ' ,... I TYPE R·IA RESIDENTIAL I •d ,a'Row I •• I I •· I ... I r 9• 52' . TYPE R· I RESIDENTIAL H' ROW 10' 10' 10' a· 36' TYPE R·2 RESIDENTIAL SO'ROW 110' I 11' 11' I io' I 42' TYPE c-1 COLLECTOR &4' ROW I 12' u' 11' 12· I io· •• •• I 4&' I. TYPE INDUSTRIAL E... :,::,·,,,.: .... ::,: ... .L::~ .. :: "-~ I ,2· I 75'ROW 1'!11-l'IJNCTIOlh 11:-fllllCTIOllt l'ISTDf DESIGN: 1'!11-l'IJNCTll'III ITIITEI< DESIGlh IIYIITEI< DESIGN, SEall<l!AA'tfUMCTl1'111 IYSTP DESIGNt .. .. .. TYPE R:tft lf'.$1PfN'tll -·-,u111 le rlfht-of._, far wtllltlN • ,.,.. • --.., ,.....,. lli,,t -air to •J-=~•:; uf• ..-ml• clrcul.-tloa. a. Ltalhd to..,, • ..:::, toap, er I\.•_..,. ..,...... ft:lo _,,,. ,,.,.r11, • toletr fM ,..., .. ma ot flt.t ttrNt. a. No IM.-...cffN •Ith .... r ttlro.tft •trwts ---,t at_._. trot• ••• c. -14 -l>o all .... oltll 11-1 olfla •tr- -• t•terMctkMe •Itta•••,.,.. ot ....,._ft,.,._ NOUl411 ll•ltN. .. Cllty Eaal--·d dohnllM that tho ~-··---,. cca.p,stl•t• •1111 flw ••·•· eywta Mtfll>lhtMII la tH laadl.te..-.• ,. Tun~• AOilt, ..,_ • owttlN rlflt-of ... ey 411.....,. et ff .... t 100 twt. t-Qrb ,.,,., .. •II-. •• IIHI-tar I .. trOlfl~ •-• Prov-ldll ilCaH fo ,-f"Cllla I• low to Mt• -•11Y Nl1dMtJ1I ...... •• Tr••fer toc•t t'WtdHtral tretflc 1'o coU4tC'tGr .,,... .... •• Pro.I,.. ... bile tf .. t-ot .... ., for fflUtlH. c., ,.,.. N OIMft I~ to ,..._1a Ugllt _, atr to lldjac:Nlt ,ropN"tl••• d., PrcwfM for uf• ,-.,trl• clrc•l•tl-.. a+ USN tor KC9H to low 1'0 .. , ....... lty twlCIIMtlal ..... b. ltrwt ,-ttwn• ahcnd d dlaco.-991 tarough fflfttc. c. Unfaterntr,t• 1tre.t MSl!Nllt• lhOitt• ao, ....cl 1'00 twt. d., ,.,......, lntarHctlons lhollld .. M'Ofdld. .. iwtwHctlOJ1• wtt'tl ••• 1.._ of tt.orou9bfara1 ...,.If • ll•lhd. t.. CWf> ~ htg •IIONd .. g. o.,1.-e1 tor lcw to _,.,._.. traf fie ,...., .. I'tf£ •2 Bf:ttPfHU I :=:. ac:cna 1'0 t.lQft N11:ttty nnldNtfel ...... pant.a. 11M a.. Pre.I• .-11c rlpt-o1.,..,. fw "1'Ultl .. . .. ..,... • OIMift •JM1<;• to,..._, ... lld'lt •d atr to MJMNt propertt••· c. ~I• for Mft '110tatrl• Clt"CvlatlN+ a. tJNd for c:trc,datfor. WOUll4 -••~ta whldt llft'lrah ,_,__,. trafUe .olUNa. .. CUrb ptrkl"t •• 1-.d, c. ONfpt for ••ret• tretflc •IJIMd4 ner ii:J Al IESTPB CoUKt tretflc fro. loc•t ,..,.,ntrel stNna tllftd tr••f•r It to tflOl'Wghf•H• and ,,._,_, c1rcwhrttoa ...,._. • .,... cc.et'Clal ...... .., Pre.Ide publ le rlgh,t,,,,of...,.y ._. atllltln,. ... lerwe u optft lp,tre» to,..._,_, llt,tt _,. air to _,Jac:eat ~rtf••• e.. Prowlde tor uf• ,..,.,trt• cl~ulatlf>II,. a. UHd llllw• trefflc .«>h•M Hrrat four •111 ,.,.. .. •• $hovld N prcwtNd M l•I f •H• "'tilrwh ...... NrYlftt • r•fdMtlet cott.etwL c. C..• .......... -••1tM. d, -Ill"" fw -ot• trofllc •-• DTf I tHDll$ISfN Tr•uhr h1dustrlaf tntUc f,oa lftdwstrJal w•• to two1,1ptv .... .. ProvlM p1,1bl le rlS,.t-of,....•y tar ltUlttn., la,. ,.,..,. •• ope11 space to .,cwldl IIQht tlftd air to NJamnt prop•M'IN. •• UtN NJ-=-rtt to hHlu1trl1I ly IOMIII ~rty., ·• aw-, perk lag IMVl4 •ot he al IONO .. EXHIBIT 1: Residential. Collector, and Industrial Street Standards 45 IYST91 OE$1Glh 12· 12· -I\INCTION• $TSTEM DEStGNi EXHIBIT 2: TYPE T-I • THOROUGHFARE rm: I•l DIBlWUFHE lbrtJ lvge ••-• ot traffic oa IOfiQ ltm"&lty trlp1. a. PNwlH pub I le rlglrt-of-.ay f« wttlftln. •• S.rw u ope,11 •,-.cti to ,,._t • U-• •• eft' to edJecMt propertt•-. c,. Pr0¥1H caatroJl•d •--• to tlft4 , .. •1e1; ..-,.-. 1.,... ¥01_.. of tralflc.. •• Prortlde at Wpc"Ollf•Mlr OM •II• 111:t.,..•la., ·• TM el_,ta of flit thor-o.lifltar• 9Jtt• OIOV-, lie t,,terconnec:tad, alhwtng tr•fflc to flow. C. ec..rcra, fHd IIHI lfflOuld .. Ualted to tti, lat,rMCtlOI• of tlioroltghf•r•• d. ornrt .C:CH• to ·-.... tty ,-reals doufd " ..-clcltd. •• l'raUlc ,woJ-• abotdd IIOt .._.. 800 WblC:IN par .... ,..- lilc:Klr furl ng pNk flours. f., Proitlde NPllfd• rlr,trt-twa IIMI at lnte~toe:s wtth of'Nr thoroqrtfaru. SI• Optloul ralMd luftcap,ed •Ill• or Ullitlnuoua left ti,n ,., .. •• Curll ,.,..Ina ,rohfblted. ,. "-•Ion SP,Hd ot '' to .. , •I IH ,.r tJow-. TYPE T-2 THOROUGHFARE 12' 110·11ow 12· 12· 12' 12' 12' 86' ~ larg1 WI_.. ot traffic on IO"'t fntraclty or latarcttr 1Ttp1. .. .. .. .. b, .. .. f, .. h. ,. Jtro\'ldt: publfc rld,t-of'""rt for vtlUtln • Se,..,. u o,-n 1pac• to p,-0¥1de IIOftt and air to _.JMllfflf ~=t:;trol l•d .CC.H to tud .... whldl aenwat. ..... woh•n of •utOc. P'rO¥lfl If _,pro••••••Y CM •It• tftt.,..•••• The •INHtt Of titl ffieroughtare 1y,t• tthot114 N ll1t•rconnectM. atlowlng trefffc to flow .. Cc:lutrclal •• ,uj IIHI thould N UaJtd to tt• lftt•rHCtlon1 of tliorolgtif•r•• IJINIC • .COffl to IO'II densltr re1ldentl•· .,.re.ii shOtilld N .-.ofded~ Tr.ttlc irolr.a.-1 1tiovlCI not owM toe wll-letH ,.r laM ,-:r hour d-,rfng ,.a houra. PnwlN •P•rtt• rls,t;t ,._,.,. •--•t retersectlo•• wtth otti•r thorou~f.,. .... ()ptlonal llftdtca,,ed ,.., ... -4llft or contl•IIOV• ••tt t•,.. .... " Curtli p«klng pN)tilltltH. 0.af r,-•,-ed of 35' to 9-0 al IH ,.,. Illar. Thoroughfare Standards 46 I I I I 4' I I I I ,t ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I t I I I I I ,Jr;tl1:1' , .. r;t ea' NO' THOROUGHFARE RIGHT· TURN LAYOUT .. .. .. g .. - r I r I I " r r I r r t r ' r t r r r r r ' ; r r us' ,;. 1&' aa' lmllClAA'f AIICTIOlh m'IUIIIESIGlh TYPE E·t EXPRESSWAY &10' ROW it zz• 1a' , 1s' ... ff Pf f-1 fR'BfUW'X -.:W. t.-. W:IWIM of ltlftlflterntptN traffic°" IOftt latrctty • , .......... trip,. .. .. .. •• c. .. .. -•• publ I< rlfll,,-..t-wy fw otllltl ... lerM N, ~ a,-. to pt'OIIIN UQftt MIi elr to ad,Jacnt ,....,.., ... O"'lflll -Id-•• NJo, II"-.. _ lhl .. ore• an4 worthtQ wH•• l,cceu to Mln ,., .. lhNi4 .. fJ"0',11411id ooh at tttt.r..::tlona •ltti thorQtatMM'U. Sy.-t• should N contlfu1011t• tdtfa M atrMt Clf' ttUroad r:.:::!.-rto .. ...,., . Outgn spud of 60 allu per MW" ow-•• ,.,... . TYPE E~2 EXPRESSWAY soo'Row -It 12'10' 41' ~ tar .. ••-• of v11taterrvpt-ad trefftc al1' 11:fS,. •PHd N IOng latrac:lty or lnten:1ty trtt•• .. .. c. d. .. Prov IN Pftl fc rfgtrt-,of..._," for uttUttn. ,.,..,. N o,,.n &,-ca to provr• UtM' Nd •Ir to MJ..,.t pl"Opff'tln. Outen lhoufd ,nr.,IGe N,Jor U111ilag1• bet.Na, IJ•I•·.,.. Md workfft9 .,.. ... ltcc»H to Nlft INN IIW>uld IN provided onty at tatarMCt Iona .,, .. t~f•r••• $ytt• tl'lould M eoritln110U11• •Ith AO..,._, or r•lll"Old r•d• etotafaga. fro.tage f'Mdl to N Qer;19"t,. Duft,, apN4 of 10 altH pir NW1' on Nlft l•H• EXHIBIT 3: Expressway Standards 47 Traffic control Device§ Traffic control devices, including pavement markings, channelizing islands, traffic signs, school signals, and traffic signals, are the means by which the road user is advised as to detailed requirements or conditions affecting road use at specific places and times in order that proper action may be taken and accidents or delay avoided. Maximum safety and efficiency in the use of streets can be obtained only with the employment of the most advanced traffic control devices. Any traffic control device should meet five requirements. It should be capable of fulfilling an important need, command attention, convey a clear, simple meaning, command respect, and be located so as to give adequate time for response. In order to insure that these requirements will be met, four basic considerations--design, placement, maintenance, and uniformity--must be considered. In an effort to establish and promote the most desirable or functional standards for traffic control devices, the National Joint Committee on Uniform Traffic Control devices has prepared the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for street§ and Hf'ghways. This manual is used by the City of Lubbock, by the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, and by the majority of the cities and other local governmental agencies throughout the nation. 48 r > ' r r r I r l l r r • r 1 r r r ' r r • . ' r r r i r . ' - Traffic signals Lubbock's traffic signal program includes the installation of approximately 4 new signals per year, operation and maintenance of approximately 200 existing signals, and the installation and maintenance of school speed-zone flashers. A major portion of the program involves operation of a computerized signal system. In 1983, Lubbock completed the installation of the present computerized signal system that controls 107 signals in eleven subsystems throughout the city. Funded with bond revenues, the Perkin-Elmer digital mini computer system replaced the PR analog computer system that had been installed in the early 1970's with Traffic Operations Program to Increase Capacity and Safety (TOPICS) funds. The city employed Kimley-Born Associates, Inc. as a consultant ' for assistance in the design, construction, and integration of this system. The total project was budgeted at $4.3 million. Total expenditures at the end of installation were approximately $3.4 million. The installation of the computer, new control equipment at 130 intersections, and new interconnect wiring was accompanied with the installation of new timing plans for approximately 4 time periods throughout the day for each of the subsystems. At present the system utilizes 200 detectors to assist in the selection of a proper pattern from a library of some 96 patterns. Additionally, the detectors may be used to measure congestion in terms of 49 vehicle speeds, occupancy, and volumes. The digital computer utilized can prepare reports and print them to the line printer or to any of the terminals in the control center, shop maintenance area or to the telephone dial up terminal. Daily reports on magnetic tape may be obtained for record keeping. Traffic Signs and Marking The oldest device for controlling, safeguarding, or expediting traffic is the traffic sign. Functionally, signs are classified in three categories: 1) regulatory signs to inform the motorist of the traffic laws or regulations that apply to the public streets or highways; 2) warning signs to inform the motorist of conditions in or adjacent to a street or highway that are potentially hazardous to traffic operations; and 3) guide signs to inform the motorist of route, destination, or other pertinent information. Street markings provide for the orderly alignment and movement of traffic along a street. Traffic markings, such as lines, buttons, words, etc., are specialized types of traffic messages in which the legend is in contrasting color and brightness with the pavement, curb, or other background. For example, center lines, lane lines, and simple channelization for left turn lanes, all of which are used extensively in Lubbock, can be provided by the use of paint markings. To be fully effective, signs and markings must be 50 r I : r l • r l r r I ,... ' r { r l r I ' . r r l r r r • r r r ' : """" ! equally .as visible for night driving as for daylight driving • Channelization Channelization generally involves the use of islands and markings to control, direct, and protect both vehicular and pedestrian traffic at the intersection. Concrete islands, buttons, and painted islands are some of the type of channelization that are being used successfully in Lubbock. Combinations of these devices often can be used with good effect in the revision of intersection layouts for safer and better operation. The specific type of installations are selected after an intersection evaluation. The objectives of intersection channelization are to assure orderly movement, increase capacity, improve safety, and provide maximum convenience. When the design provides for orderly movement and adequate capacity, improved safety and convenience will result. The moderate increases in right of way area which may be required and the cost required to provide channelization at intersections are usually justified by improved traffic operations. A continuing program of intersection improvements by the addition of channelization is followed as a routine operation by the City of Lubbock and the Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation. 51 one-way streets One-way streets usually afford the most immediate and least expensive method of improving traffic flow. The use of one-way streets fits a basic traffic engineering aim to make the best use of existing facilities. Map 1 illustrates one way streets in the City of Lubbock. One-way streets have a number of characteristics that fncrease street capacity and traffic safety. Intersection conflicts are reduced and opposing traffic is eliminated, resulting in reduced accident potential and lower accident rates. Traffic signals can be better timed for progressive movement, keeping vehicles in orderly groups with well- defined crossing intervals for pedestrians and vehicles. One-way streets can take advantage of odd roadway widths and odd numbers of lanes. Parking and passing maneuvers are made less hazardous. The carrying capacity of a street may be increased 20 to 50 percent by conversion to one-way operation, with greatest advantage occurring on narrow streets. One-way streets first appeared in Lubbock in December 1956, and 16.4 miles of one-way streets are currently designated. One-way streets also have a few drawbacks. Motorists may be compelled to travel further to get to their destinations. Without adequate cross-connection, congestion may be created at the ends of one-way streets. One-way streets may involve rerouting of transit vehicles, which could have an adverse effect on ridership, due to changes in 52 ,... L r. I I l , ,- } .. n r r r t . r l . -l I . ' r- 1 .··• r"": I \, • r r I .. r i, 1 I . ' -i long-established riding habits. Finally, one-way streets may work to the disadvantage of businesses dependent on traffic from a certain direction, such as eating establishments, gas stations, and automatic teller machines. (How to Get The Most out of our streets, 1955, p. 19.) Speed control Speed zoning is the establishment of reasonable limits based on traffic engineering studies at locations where the physical conditions of the street or activities along the street, such as schools or hospitals, may warrant such limits. Time controlled flashing signs limit the speed on major streets and highways at school crossings in Lubbock for limited periods of two or three times per school day. The use of these controlled flashing signs eliminates unreasonable delay to the motorist during non-school hours. Speed limits in Lubbock are under continuous review by the City and the Texas Highway Department to determine the operating speed offering the greatest safety at the least cost of time. 53 ii/ ~I/ b~•t:Jt:::-1• d t::lbY ~t:Jo~I!' n:-: '' = 'Y':!Bf !:_;~_ ·••-:r~.---=;-'~i==irr 4iui. I t>m~ J i:.t~1 .a,~ ,~, Jllq 1r -,~~~Ei~,l•~~fti..2! ~ .. -. , r L i ~ I t r- 1 . r r t r ! r,_ r r ,-; r r r L r I ' r VEHICLE OCCUPANCY SURVEY The Urban Transportation Study Office of the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, District Five, conducted a vehicle occupancy study from May 26 to July 2, 1981, to determine the Average Occupancy Rate (AOR) for Lubbock, Texas. The average occupancy rate is the average number of persons per automobile, and is one measure of how efficiently streets and highways are being used. To conduct the survey, manual counts were made at twenty-three stations from 7:00 to 9:00 weekday mornings. The counts included the morning peak traffic period because the home to work trip historically has the lowest occupancy rate and the greatest opportunity for ride-sharing. At each location, counts were made in five minute intervals throughout the two hour period. For the first four minutes, vehicles were counted and categorized into one, two, three, four, five, or six or more passenger automobiles. The remaining minute was used to record data and reset counters. Totals for the four minute counts were later expanded to represent five minute counts by multiplying by a factor of 1.25. Trucks and buses were counted and shown in separate categories. Trucks were defined as vehicles with mor~ than two axles (excluding buses). Commercial pick-ups and vans whose primary purpose was not transporting people were also classified as trucks for the purpose of this survey. 55 The twenty-three stations selected for the survey all lie within the Lubbock Intensive Study Area. Seven of the stations are located on the major incoming highways, one is on the most heavily traveled section of Loop 289, two stations are on one-way inbound streets on the outskirts of the Central Business District, and the rest are located on major thoroughfares. At all locations, except for the one- way streets, traffic was counted in both directions. Map 2 shows the location of each station. Table 9 shows the number of automobiles (excluding trucks and buses), the number of automobile occupants, the average occupancy rate, and the percent of automobiles with one, two, and three passengers. Table 10 is a comparison of automobile and occupancy data for the City of Lubbock, for the years 1980 and 1981. Also contained in this table are the average fuel prices for the months of April, May, and June for 1980 and 1981, as obtained from the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce. Information in Table 10 shows the average occupancy rate for the City of Lubbock dropping from 1.28 persons per vehicle in 1980 to 1.27 persons per vehicle in 1981. The increase in total number of occupants was offset by an increase in total autos which accounts for the slight drop in persons per vehicle from 1980 to 1981,. The conclusion to be drawn is that there are more vehicles on the road, making more trips, with slightly fewer occupants per vehicle. 56 r r ! r l : r i. r r r r- l ~ I l .r ' ,- r r \ MAP2 TRAFFIC COUNT STATIONS LUBBOCK INTENSIVE STUDY AREA JULY 1981 I fcii'YLIMIT I ___ _, I Ir•----J 8 - ___ ....., _____________ .!J:.....,1 __ :::j ----+---.iiiiioi;;,,,..._ e u.i ~ 12 13 14 .,__ _ _.._ .... ...,__~~---1---~34;;:..::.:th.:..:S:::..,t.. b:_1_e+---1--1---..;;::;::a ~ a x: C( ILi i5 18 20 i?: ~50th.St~ 22 66 . St. 23 82 nd.St. th. St 57 i I L---1 I I TABLE 9 LUBBJCK INrENSIVE STUDY AREA VEHICll: CXXXJ.PANCY RATE DATA JULY 1981 -1 ADTOS wrm - 1 2 3 flrA DIR ADTOS CXXXJ.PANI'S AOR CXXXJ.PAN.1' CXXXJ.PANI'S CXXXJ.PAN.l'S cxm:.nm HIGHWAYS 1 s 451 628 1.39 71.6 20.2 6.4 N 518 720 1.39 69.5 24.3 4.6 2 SW 638 864 1.35 73.7 21.3 2.8 NE 413 616 1.49 67.8 20.8 7.3 3 NW 368 490 1.33 73.1 21.7 4.1 SE 413 566 1.37 73.1 20.8 3.1 4 N 535 676 1.26 78.9 17.4 2.6 s 384 569 1.48 68.8 19.3 7.6 5 NE 504 661 1.31 77.4 17.1 3.6 SW 365 558 1.53 66.8 21.6 5.2 6 E 662 890 1.34 75.1 17.8 4.8 w 766 1029 1.34 74.0 20.5 3.5 7 SE 477 617 1.29 77.4 18.0 3.4 NW 314 460 1.46 68.2 22.3 5.7 FREEWAYS AND THOROOGBFARES IN TOlN 8 s 422 543 1.29 78.0 17.1 4 N 691 887 1.29 78.0 17.7 3.2 9 E 1712 2081 1.22 82.8 14.1 2.4 w 884 1246 1.41 69.5 21.7 7.5 *10 s 703 904 1.29 78.1 17.1 3.1 11 w 691 976 1.41 69.8 22.7 5.2 E 325 447 1.38 75.1 16.9 4.6 12 N 1298 1636 1.26 79.7 16.2 2.7 s 850 1124 1.32 74.9 20.0 3.8 *13 N 913 1125 1.23 79.0 19.2 1.5 14 w 559 739 1.32 72.5 19.7 5.9 E 321 462 1.44 71.0 19.3 5.9 15 E 1746 2219 1.27 80.0 14.9 3.7 w 800 1077 1.35 73.9 20.1 4.5 16 E 1246 1482 1.19 84.0 13.8 1.4 w 610 787 1.29 74.8 71.6 2 17 N 943 1181 1.25 79.3 17.5 2.3 s 693 862 1.24 79.4 17.6 2.3 18 N 1276 1533 1.20 82.0 16.3 1.3 s 576 720 1.25 80.7 15.3 2.8 19 N 1276 1545 1.21 82.5 14.4 2.5 s 523 618 1.18 84.3 13.4 2.1 20 N 1333 1636 1.23 82.1 14.6 2.3 s 686 814 1.19 84.7 12.7 2 21 N 875 1087 1.24 81.5 14.3 3.2 s 618 802 1.30 77.0 18.6 3.1 22 E 1584 1820 1.15 87.4 21.5 4.5 w 745 957 1.28 76.2 20.0 2.8 23 E 2709 3153 1.16 85.9 12.5 1.1 w 1209 1600 1.32 76.9 18.3 3.5 *ONE WAY SI'REETS 58 r-, l , ,... l . . r r r r t ' r r I ' r r t ' r ' ,... l , r r ' ' ,... I ' r . r r TABLE 10 LUBBOCK INTENSIVE STUDY AREA VEHICLE OCCUPANCY RATE SUMMARY FOR CITY OF LUBBOCK 1980 -1981 illD. *TOTAL AUTOS 43085 TOTAL OCCUPANTS 55,014 AVERAGE OCCUPANCY RATE ·1.28 PERCENT AUTOS WITHs 1 OCCUPANT 78.5% 2 OCCUPANTS 16.9% 3 OCCUPANTS 3.41 AVERAGE FUEL PRICE $1.209 llll 44,531 56,759 1.27 78.71 18.21 3.41 $1.289 *This number does not include trucks and buses. 59 • 60 r t r i r i r r r r- 1 r i r r r r i I r l r ' ,- ) I r j ' r r l , ,- TBOROOGBPARE PLAN REVISION One of the most important components of this Orban Transportation Plan Op~ate is the revised Thoroughfare Plan. The Thoroughfare Plan is a graphic representation in map form of the existing and proposed street system (collector level and higher) for the City of Lubbock and surrounding area. Several activities are involved in revising the Thoroughfare Plan. First, the serial zone land use analysis (existing land use and population information) is updated in preparation for review and revision of the existing thoroughfare system as modeled on the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation computer. After new street facilities are introduced to the model, numerous tests and staff discussions validate the updated computer information. The updated computer model represents the existing thoroughfare system within the study area. Then, projected land use, population, and proposed thoroughfares are introduced into the computer model, which then provides projected traffic volumes. From these data, the proposed thoroughfare system is adjusted, and staff recommendations for revision of the Thoroughfare Plan are made. There are several factors involved in updating the Thoroughfare Plan. The most obvious is the existing thoroughfare system, which serves as the basis from which to build. Another guideline is from the Lubbock Comprehensive Land Use Plan, which proposes thoroughfares on section lines 61 and collectors on half-section lines. A third consideration is the readability of the Thoroughfare Plan map. The map must be constructed so that all major types of thoroughfares can be represented and th~ir existing or proposed status clearly stated, and yet it has to be easily read and understood. The 1986 Thoroughfare Plan Update as attached was approved by the Steering Committee of the Lubbock Urban Transportation Study, acting as the Metropolitan Planning Organization through contract with the State of Texas. It was then approved by the Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan Study Policy Advisory Committee. The Lubbock City Council approved the plan in draft on January 23, 1986. 62 r l r I r ! ,- i -i l r l r I. r ; , r l r t r r ,.... ! t r ' r- ( . r I ' , r-, ' r ' r l , BIBLIOGRAPHY Printed sources Chamber of commerce of the United States. Bow to Get the Most out of our streets. Washington, D.c.1 Transportation and Communication Department, 1955. Lubbock, Texas. Annual Budget 1985-1986, LT FORM 3.0. Lubbock, Texas. Avalanche-Journal, various dates. Lubbock, Texas. City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, and Texas Highway Department. Lubbock urban Transportation Plan. Volume 2, 1964. Lubbock, Texas. City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, and Texas Highway Department. Lubbock urban Transportation Plan. Volume 3, 1975. Lubbock, Texas. Evening Journal. various dates. Lubbock, Texas. Planning Department. Comprehensive Land use Plan update, 1983. Lubbock, Texas. Planning Department. Land Use, Volume 7, Lubbock Comprehensive Plan, 1974. Lubbock, Texas. Planning Department. strategies for Responsible Growth; Interstate 21 corridor Land use Pl.An, 1986. Lubbock, Texas. Urban Renewal Agency. Clifford Cason and Associates. Lubbock central Business District Development Plan, 1975. National Academy of Sciences. Parking Principles. Special Report 125. Washington, D.c., 1971. Texas. State Department of Highways and Public Transportation. Lubbock urban Transportation study Assignment os-os-3R6. 1985. Texas. State Department of Highways and Public Transportation. unified work Program for Transportation Planning, Lubbock Urbanized Area, 1986. u.s. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration, Region 6. Interstate 27 in the City of Lubbock, Texas: Environmental Impact statement, 1979. 63 Interviews Cantu, Sylvester. Administrative Assistant for Transit, City of Lubbock, Texas, April 1985. Johnson, Bill. Assistant Director of Aviation, City of Lubbock, Texas, April 1985. McDaniel, Bill. Assistant to the Traffic Engineer, City of Lubbock, Texas, April 1985. 64 r r r l r I . r r r t ' ' r r r r r r r r r r I . r ' APPENDIX Traffic volumes Table 11 illustrates traffic volumes on selected Lubbock streets for 1964, 1968, 1971, and 1983, and projected volumes for 2005. The rising traffic counts on city streets are indicative of greater population, more vehicles per capita, and increasing growth to the south and southwest portions of the city. Accidents Table 12 is a comparison of intersections where ten or more accidents occurred in 1963, 1970, and 1984. Table 13 is a comparison of a larger group of intersections in 1970 and 1984. Basically, the number of accidents in the City of Lubbock has increased since 1963. This increase can be attributed to two major factors, larger population and more vehicles per dwelling unit. This means more trips are generated, and thus more opportunities for accidents are presented. 65 0\ 0\ TABLE 11 TRAFFIC VOLUMES, SELECTED LUBBOCK STREETS 1964, 1968, 1971, 1983, AND 2005 19711 4TH STREET WEST OF SLIDE 2,958 5,620 7,510 4TH STREET EAST OF QUAKER 4,612 7,360 11,350 4TH STREET WEST OF INDIANA 4TB STREET WEST OF BROWNFIELD 4TH STREET EAST OF UNIVERSITY 21,322 21,640 22,420 4TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE Q 22,236 20,620 19,110 4TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE H 20,780 18,300 18,480 4TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE A 19,030 15,630 16,060 19TH STREET WEST OF LOOP 289 8,800 8,270 9,690 19TH STREET WEST OF SLIDE ROAD 10,683 9,160 10,460 19TH STREET WEST OF QUAKER AVE. 17,447 20,380 15,900 19TH STREET WEST OF BROWNFIELD 14,240 21,073 14,620 18,977 15,490 14,340 16,290 15,738 29,930 45,581 28,500 33,897 22,840 22,749 15,270 20,603 21,400 28,763 16,010 18,078 20,840 24,931 24,720 23,635 I , J 19641 19681 19711 19832 20053 19TH STREET EAST OF BROWNFIELD 35,350 35,853 19TB STREET WEST OF INDIANA 24,233 25,370 27,730 38,320 27,553 19TH STREET EAST OF UNIVERSITY 20,064 21,720 22,910 30,380 33,302 19TB STREET WEST OF AVENUE Q 20,061 18,950 19,150 25,120 30,949 19TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE A 12,145 10,860 11,730 12,180 12,291 34TH STREET EAST OF LOOP 289 695 1,430 2,340 8,060 15,983 34TH STREET EAST OF SLIDE ROAD 6,621 8,170 8,370 12,910 11,083 0\ 34TH STREET WEST OF QUAKER AVENUE 14,518 13,470 16,700 21,570 21,851 --.I 34TH STREET WEST OF INDIANA AVENUE 19,518 16,810 20,760 22,260 19,185 34TH STREET EAST OF UNIVERSITY AVE. 20,587 18,200 20,140 19,770 22,374 34TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE Q 21,249 18,240 20,150 17,340 23,401 34TB STREET WEST OF AVENUE H 14,066 14,270 14,120 14,810 27,620 34TB STREET WEST OF AVENUE A 11,293 8,050 9,790 11,550 12,127 50TH STREET EAST OF SLIDE ROAD 6,018 7,420 8,230 9,370 23,856 50TH STREET WEST OF QUAKER AVE. 8,565 10,410 13,130 27,110 25,886 50TB STREET WEST OF INDIANA AVE. 15,462 20,170 21,130 30,100 28,105 19711 50TH STREET EAST OF UNIVERSITY AVE. 24,557 28,210 28,230 29,370 28,775 50TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE Q 20,852 27,450 22,680 25,150 31,511 50TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE H 11,952 12,180 14,830 14,300 28,832 50TH STREET WEST OF AVENUE A 7,218 9,730 9,010 10,290 9,592 82ND STREET EAST OF SLIDE ROAD 12,490 14,383 82ND STREET WEST OF QUAKER AVE. 14,200 19,469 82ND STREET WEST OF INDIANA AVE. 16,160 24,970 0\ 82ND STREET EAST OF UNIVERSITY AVE. 10,350 23,750 CX) 82ND STREET WEST OF TAHOKA HIGHWAY 4,630 24,169 SLIDE ROAD SOUTH OF 4TH STREET 1,795 5,510 5,680 9,590 16,663 SLIDE ROAD SOUTH OF 19TH STREET 5,882 6,230 9,660 13,950 20,189 SLIDE ROAD SOUTH OF 34TH STREET 10,292 11,580 14,400 24,800 25,430 SLIDE ROAD NORTH OF 50TH STREET 6,531 8,860 11,130 24,170 25,320 SLIDE ROAD SOUTH OF LOOP 289 SOUTH 1,494 1,580 1,530 24,420 25,461 SLIDE ROAD SOUTH OF 82ND STREET 8,280 20,495 19641 19681 19711 19832 20051 QUAKER AVENUE SOUTH OF 4TH STREET 1,978 3,020 6,330 9,860 13,388 QUAKER AVENUE NORTH OF 19TH STREET 2,635 4,110 8,750 11,530 15,392 QUAKER AVENUE SOUTH OF 34TH STREET 9,808 10,580 16,180 21,210 29,629 QUAKER AVENUE SOUTH OF 50TH STREET 2,475 5,530 8,610 19,280 24,151 QUAKER AVENUE NORTH OF LOOP 289 s. 3,570 19,590 29,208 QUAKER AVENUE SOUTH OF 82ND STREET 810 20,764 INDIANA AVENUE SOUTH OF 4TH STREET 11,690 16,155 INDIANA AVENUE SOUTH OF 19TH STREET 7,515 8,960 12,700 16,830 22,357 °' l,O INDIANA AVENUE SOUTH OF 34TH STREET 11,563 12,500 14,370 27,310 21,806 INDIANA AVENUE SOUTH OF 50TH STREET 7,650 10,070 12,440 26,470 22,859 INDIANA AVENUE NORTH OF LOOP 289 s. 1,753 3,880 5,100 27,180 38,447 INDIANA AVENUE SOUTH OF 82ND STREET 13,060 22,904 UNIVERSITY AVE. SOUTH OF LOOP 289 N. 3,650 6,430 10,560 11,809 UNIVERSITY AVE. SOUTH OF ERSKINE 9,972 9,080 11,250 14,570 19,704 UNIVERSITY AVE. SOUTH OF 4TH ST. 17,390 18,980 20,850 21,810 21,691 UNIVERSITY AVE. SOUTH OF 19TH ST. 14,898 17,500 19,840 25,940 21,270 19641 UNIVERSITY AVE. SOUTH OF 34TH ST. 11,764 15,230 12,100 26,760 25,434 UNIVERSITY AVE. SOUTH OF 50TH ST. 10,894 13,320 15,810 26,000 23,319 UNIVERSITY AVE. N. OF LOOP 289 S. 3,888 5,980 7,920 25,560 31,551 UNIVERSITY AVE. s. OF 82ND STREET 6,650 13,927 AVENUE Q NORTH OF 4TH STREET 19,837 16,790 17,540 21,070 37,598 AVENUE Q SOUTH OF 4TH STREET 15,602 14,210 14,700 24,750 28,232 AVENUE Q SOUTH OF 19TH STREET 20,357 21,160 22,220 28,520 12,445 ..... AVENUE Q SOUTH OF 34TB STREET 20,375 19,990 23,070 27,590 13,231 0 AVENUE Q SOUTH OF 50TH STREET 10,563 12,690 12,780 22,610 8,224 AVENUE H NORTH OF 4TH STREET 9,810 7,950 6,870 7,940 4,494 AVENUE B NORTH OF 19TH STREET 8,765 6,220 5,620 6,820 18,446 AVENUE H NORTH OF 34TH STREET 12,426 12,800 12,560 15,200 11,567 AVENUE H NORTH OF 50TB STREET 9,886 11,410 12,110 13,280 103,673 AVENUE H SOOTH OF TRAFFIC CIRCLE 11,518 13,870 15,560 29,890 88,612 AVENUE H SOOTH OF LOOP 289 S. 9,365 12,080 13,260 21,380 67,891 19641 19681 19111· 19832 20053 AVENUE A NORTH OF 4TH STREET 8,560 7,960 7,260 6,910 48,120 AVENUE A NORTH OF 19TH STREET 16,067 15,610 15,450 14,800 10,798 AVENUE A NORTH OF 34TB STREET 18,438 18,370 17,160 20,030 6,032 AVENUE A NORTH OF 50TH STREET 10,752 11,690 12,260 15,480 4,539 AVENUE A NORTH OF TRAFFIC CIRCLE 13,100 8,768 As the traffic counts indicate, the amount of traffic has shown a steady increase since 1964. This increase is due to overall city growth and a general increase in the number of cars per household. 1 Table 21, Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan, Volume 3, p. 77-79. ~ 1983 24 Hour Weekday Traffic Volumes, Lubbock Orban Transportation Study Area. Lubbock Urban Transportation Study Assignment -5-05-3R6, 1985. TABLE 12 SELECTED LUBBOCK INTERSECTIONS HAVING 10 OR MORE ACCIDENTS ANNUALLY 1963, 1970, AND 1984 INTERSECTION O-B-A TRAFFIC CIRCLE 19TH ST. AND AVE. B 19TH ST. AND BOSTON 19TH ST. AND BROWNFIELD 19TH ST. AND FLINT 50TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 50TH ST. AND FLINT 50TH ST. AND AVE. U 50TH ST. AND AVE. 0 34TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 34TH ST. AND AVE. A 4TH ST. AND AVE. H 19TH ST. AND AVE. K BROADWAY AND AVE. H 15TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY TOTAL 25 20 17 16 15 15 10 13 11 10 13 14 12 11 li 212 40 ll 4 5 5 li. 225 1Table 24, Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan, Volume 3, 1970-1990, p. 89. 95 17 18 36 19 26 5 19 15 20 7 5 11 4 ll 308 2Traffic Engineering Department, City of Lubbock. *corrections from Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan, Volume 3. 72 ,- I [ ,... TABLE 13 I i I • LUBBOCK INTERSECTIONS HAVING 10 OR MORE ACCIDENTS ANNUALLY: r 1970 AND 1984 l IHIEiBSEiCIION li201 lifH2 r O-H-A TRAFFIC CIRCLE 40 95 r 4TH ST. AND AVE. H 20 5 4TH ST. AND AVE. 0 11 16 r 4TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 12 30 I 4TH ST. AND BROWNFIELD 11 12 r [ . 4TH ST. AND SLIDE RD. 10 r 4TH ST. AND FRANKFORD 19 6TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 20 21 r MAIN AND AVE. 0 10 11 I . BROADWAY AND AVE. A 20 19 r BROADWAY AND AVE. 0 16 20 r BROADWAY AND UNIVERSITY 16 t 15TH ST. AND AVE. H 12 2 r 15TH ST. AND AVE. L . 10 0 15TH ST. AND AVE. M 10 2 r 15TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 14 11 ! 16TH ST. AND AVE. J 10 5 r I . 19TH ST. AND AVE. A 16 r 19TH ST. AND TEXAS 10 12 t . 19TH ST. AND AVE. H 11 17 r 19TH ST. AND AVE. K 5 11 I, 19TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 65 ,- I 19TH i ST. AND BOSTON 4 18 r 73 r- t I l INTERSECTION 19701 1984 2 19TH ST. AND FLHi.! 15 19 19TH ST. AND BROWNFIELD 4 36 22ND ST. AND UNIVERSITY 13 .16 34TH ST. AND AVE. A 10 7 34TH ST. AND AVE. Q 23 17 34TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 39 20 34TH ST. AND BOSTON 25 19 34TH ST. AND INDIANA 11 34TH ST. AND SLIDE RD. 10 26 50TH ST. AND SOUTHEAST DR. 15 50TH ST. AND AVE. A 15 50TH ST. AND AVE. H 10 50TH ST. AND AVE. Q 8 15 50TH ST. AND AVE. u 14 19 50TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 29 26 50TH ST. AND BOSTON 10 7 50TH ST. AND ELGIN 20 15 50TH ST. AND FLINT 7 5 50TH ST. AND INDIANA 23 50TH ST. AND MEMPHIS 10 13 50TH ST. AND UTICA 11 50TH ST. AND SLIDE RD. 15 58TH ST. AND INDIANA 10 60TH ST. AND SLIDE RD. 14 62ND ST. AND SLIDE RD. 12 66TH ST. AND AVE. P 10 74 r r r ,- ,.. ' ' I r r r r r r_ r r ' r r r r r I ' ,- INTERSECTION 66TB ST. AND UNIVERSITY 66TH ST. AND INDIANA 74TH ST. AND UNIVERSITY 82ND ST. AND U.S. 87 82ND ST. AND INDIANA 82ND ST. AND QUAKER 82ND ST. AND SLIDE RD. LOOP 289 AND 4TB ST.(WEST) S. LOOP 289 AND SLIDE RD. S. LOOP 289 AND QUAKER S. LOOP 289 AND INDIANA S. LOOP 289 AND UNIVERSITY S. LOOP 289 AND QUIRT LOOP 289 AND IDALOU HWY. N. LOOP 289 AND QUIRT LOOP 289 AND CLOVIS RD. PARKWAY DR. AND QUIRT AMARILLO HWY.AND SPUR 326 FRANKFORD AVE. AND SPUR 327 BROWNFIELD HWY. AND LOOP 289 BROWNFIELD HWY. AND QUAKER BROWNFIELD HWY. AND INDIANA 13 15 10 15 15 12 10 14 19 13 1 Table 27, Lubbock Urban Transportation Plan, Volume 3, 1970-1990, p. 93. 2 Traffic Engineering Department, City of Lubbock. 75 18 10 12 10 10 14 11 16 19 36 29 45 12 12 2 5 16 16 11 18 21 11 76 r r t r r ! r ! r t . r r I . r • r r t r r r r r ! l r TABLE 14 FUTURE ROADWAY PROJECTS FOR LUBBOCK URBARIIBD AR.BA Project Description Length (miles) Interstate Funds: IH 27 Extension: 82nd St. to 50th St. 1.97 ands Loop 289--Construction and Paving IH 27 Extension: 4th St. to Spur 326--. 1.4 Construction and Paving IH 27 Extension: 19th St. to 4th st.--1.1 Construction and Paving IH 27 Extension: 50th St. to 19th St.--2.0 Construction and Paving Primary Funds1 SW Loop 289: u.s. 62-82 to IH 27--6.8 Reconstruction and Widening us 84: (Slaton Highway) SE Loop 289 to 3.2 Burris Switch--Level-up and Overlay us 84: Spur 331 overpass--- · Rehabilitation and Widening of Bridges and Approaches S Loop 289: FM 1730 (Slide Rd.) to 3.0 University Ave.--Modify Ramps us 62-82: SW Loop 289 to Spur 327--1.2 Reconstruction SH 114: Spur 309 to W Loop 289--4.8 Reconstruction and Widening Federal Aid Urban Funds: State Designated Highways us 82: (Brownfield Freeway) SW Loop 6.5 289 to IH 27 ROW Purchase 77 Bsti:aated Cost ($1,000s) 45,000 25,800 23,700 36,900 8,400 1,500 :soo 1,200 1,350 2,000 26,700 Project Description us 82: (Brownf if· J d Freeway) SW Loop 289 to ID 27 Construction FM 835 (E. 50th): Spur 331 to E Urban Limits--Reconstruction and Widening us 84: Traffic Circle to SE Loop 289--Level-up and Overlay SB 114: W Loop 289 to Raleigh Ave.-- Reconstruction and Widening FM 2225: Spur 309 to US 82 (Tech Freeway)--Reconstruction s Loop 289: at Quaker Ave.-- Intersection Improvements s Loop 289: at Indiana Ave.-- Intersection Improvements Federal Aid Urban Ponds, City Streets Quirt Ave.: 52nd st. to s Loop 289-- Widening and Paving Ave. e near ID 27: 1st Pl. to 3rd s~.-- ROW and Widening Indiana Ave.: 34th st. to 50th st.-- ROW, Reconstruction and Widening University Ave.: 50th st. to 66th St.--, Reconstruction Slide Rd.: 19th St. to 28th St.-- ROW, Reconstruction, and Widening Other Programs: Outer Loop FM 1585: US 84 to FM 179-- ROW and Construction FM 179: FM 1585 to FM 2641-- ROW and Construction FM 2641: FM 179 to FM 1729-- ROW and Construction 78 Length (11.iles) 6.5 1.0 1.5 2.1 8.7 1.2 0.3 1.0 1.0 0.6 17.8 12.0 16.3 Bstillatea Cost ($1,OO0s) 110,800 612 980 1,000 1,800 1,000 1,000 1,224 207 4,515 2,000 1,285 18,382 12,392 16,833 r r l , r ' ' ' r t ,... ' I r t r r I , r ' ' r I ,... i r r • r r I r r ! Project Description FM 1729: FM 2641 to FM 3020 ROW and Construction FM 835: FM 3020 to OS 84-- ROW and Construction Other Programs, 53rd Drive 53rd Drive: Construction of Overpass and Approaches Project Description Other Programs, state Programs Loop 289: at w 34th St.~- Traffic Signal Installation Loop 289: at N Quaker Ave.-- Traffic Signal Installation Loop 289: at FM 1730 (Slide Rd.)-- Intersection Improvement Loop 289: at OS 62-82 (Brownfield Bighway)--Traffic Signal Installation Other Programs, City Programs Frankford Ave.: at 34th st.-- Traffic Signal Installation 69th st.: at Slide Rd.-- Traffic Signal Installation Expansion of Computerized Traffic Signal System 34th st.: w Loop 289 to Milwaukee Ave.--ROW, Reconstruction and Widening 79 Length (llliles) 8.0 4.0 Length (miles) 0.1 0.8 Estimated cost ($1,000s) 8,262 4,131 1,500 Estimated cost (Total) 100,000 100,000 500,000 100,000 55,000 50,000 570,000 1,250,000 Proje1·~ ·,escripti,•;.1 us 84 (Ave. Q}1 at-. 50th st.-- Intersection Revision 50th st.: at Quaker Ave.-- Reconstruction 82nd st.: Ave. u to us 87-- Reconstruction and Widening 34th st.: at Quaker Ave.-- Reconstruction 50th st.: at Slide Rd.-- Reconstruction 98th St.1 Indiana Ave. to Quaker Ave.--Widening and Paving u.s. 87 (Ave. A}: at Broadway-- Traffic Signal Improvements Frankford Ave.: at 66th St.-- Traffic Signal Installation 98th st.: Quaker Ave. to Slide Rd.-- Widening and Paving us 87 (Ave. A}: at 40th St.-- Traffic Signal Installation Frankford Ave.1 66th St. to 82nd st.--Reconstruction and Widening 98th St.: Slide Rd. to Frankford Ave.--Widening and Paving Erskine St.: at IH 27-- Intersection Improvement E 19th· St.: E Loop 289 to Ute Ave.-- Reconstruction and Widening 34th st. and 29th Dr.: Dover st. to Loop 289--ROW and Construction Canyon Rd.: Ave. K to Mackenzie Park--Construction 80 Length Estimated (ailes) Cost (Total) 0.1 204,000 0.1 851,000 o.s 2,310,000 0.1 657,000 770,000 1.0 1,840,000 50,000 50,000 1.0 1,801,000 ·so,ooo 1.0 1,000,000 1.0 2,187,000 0.2 100,000 1.5 1,500,000 0.6 1,234,000 o.s 160,000 r r ,- j t . r r l r I . r I . r r r r r r l r i l r-l . r r r I""" k l l . ' Project Description University Ave.: at Auburn st.-- Traffic Signal Improvements N Quirt Ave.: at FM 2641 (Regis St.)-- Traffic Signal Installation 19th St.: at Milwaukee Ave.-- Traffic Signal Installation 81 Length (llliles) Bstiaated Cost (Total) 50,000 45,000 50,000 TABLE 15 FUTORE TRANSIT .:!\C'l'IVI'l'IES FOR LUBBOCK URBANIZED AREA Project Description Year Funding Estimated ·source Cost (fgtAl) - Operating Assistance 1987 Section 5 1,672,440 Capital Improvements 1987 Section 16b (2) 90,000 Capital Improvements 1987 Section 9 95,255 Operating Assistance 1988 Section 9 1,700,000 Capital Improvements 1988 Section 16b (2) 80,000 Operating Assistance 1989 Section 9 1,730,000 Capital Improvements 1989 Section 9 128,856 Operating Assistance 1990 Section 9 1,760,000 Capital Improvements 1990 Section 9 152,800 Operating Assistance 1991 Section 9 900,000 Capital Improvements 1991 Section 9 166,945 82