RIVER ROAD/ALVERNON WAY
COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
This meeting of the River Road/Alvernon Way
CAC was held on Thursday, March 27, 2003 at 5:30 p.m. at the Jewish Community
Center. Pat Buckley, Project Manager for Pima County Department of Transportation
(PCDOT), presided at the meeting.
ATTENDING:
Staff:
Pat Buckley, PCDOT
Carol Anton, PCDOT
Dana Hook, Castro Engineering
Frank Fry, Castro Engineering
Matt Clark, MMLA
Paul Van Calster, MMLA
Geoff Bradmon, MMLA
Scott King, MMLA
Melanie O’Quin, MMLA
Jan Gordley, Gordley Design Group
Marsha Baker, Gordley Design Group
CAC Members:
Carmen Christy
Manuel Gadea
Ken Sternstein
Louise Kligman (for Evan Kligman)
Ken Light
Bill Selby
Pat Buckley, Project Manager, introduced himself and Carol Anton from Pima County Department of Transportation (PCDOT) and noted that this was the first Community Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting since last May, when the committee reviewed the Environmental Assessment Mitigation Report (EAMR) and wrote an accompanying letter. He mentioned that the Board of Supervisors had approved the EAMR on September 17, 2002. Mr. Buckley then noted that a new consultant was brought on board in November, and asked Dana Hook, Project Manager from Castro Engineering to introduce the River Bend Roadway Design Team. Ms. Hook introduced herself and Frank Fry, Project Manager, both from Castro Engineering. She then introduced their partners from MMLA - Matt Clark, Project Manager, Paul Van Calster, Project Engineer, and Geoff Bradmon, Scott King and Melanie O’Quin, also project designers from MMLA. Mr. Buckley then introduced Jan Gordley and Marsha Baker from Gordley Design Group, in the capacity of public involvement.
Mr. Buckley stated that the purpose of this meeting, which is taking place a little before the completion of 50% plans, was to share what had been accomplished over the last few months and to give the CAC and interested parties an opportunity to look at and comment on some substantial changes. The team wanted to talk to the CAC about roadway sections, adjustments to the alignments as promised and pedestrian access.
Mr. Buckley announced that the team had incorporated the committee’s comments regarding the EAMR into the design. In review, Mr. Buckley cited that the Community Participation and Mitigation Ordinance governing the project charges the committee with reviewing neighborhood factors such as noise abatement methods, streetscape themes and architectural treatment, street lighting, access control mitigation and other neighborhood factors.
Mr. Buckley referred to plans displayed on the boards and to comment forms, which he encouraged attendees to fill out and submit after the presentation. This design team is working on River Road from Campbell Avenue to just past Dodge Boulevard. Another consultant team has just been selected and will work on the design of Alvernon Way from Fort Lowell Road, across the new bridge and tying into this project near Dodge Boulevard. That team will be on board within the next month, and both design teams will be present at the next CAC meeting. The focus of this CAC meeting was on River Road from Campbell Avenue through the River Bend area to Dodge Boulevard.
During the EAMR process, the CAC was shown a typical roadway section with four lanes divided by a median in the middle. Input from the CAC and community raised concerns regarding access to side streets and driveways, so the County decided to consider a five-lane roadway section with a continuous two-way left turn lane. In response to concerns about the width of the roadway, the design team is trying to narrow the lanes and required paved shoulders to minimize environmental impacts and allow more landscaping. A design speed of 40 mph is proposed with a posted speed of 35 mph as discussed at an earlier meeting.
From Campbell to Hacienda del Sol, an urbanized typical section with curbs is proposed. The plan is for a five-lane section with two lanes in each direction, a two-way left turn lane and a 6 foot paved shoulder. At Hacienda del Sol the roadway will go from a curbed section to a five-lane section with no curbs, with landscaping pulled closer to the roadway and a possible pedestrian path on the outside of the trees. Since the roadway is proposed to be narrower, the right of way acquisition necessary will also be reduced. Where possible, the design will maintain the rural feel with a 10’ median rather than a 20’ median and increased landscaping to break up the expanse of the asphalt. Through the Bend area, the median will be configured to allow driveway access across the roadway.
Q. Will the new narrowed configuration allow the existing trees to remain?
A. Landscaping will come close to the curb and trees will be just out of the clear zone with sidewalks located outside of the landscaping.
Q. Will the fence at El Corral and the general look of the area be kept?
A. Yes.
Q. Will the team be sensitive in its landscaping plans to people’s ability to see on-coming traffic as they come out of their driveways?
A. Absolutely, visual sight triangles are always considered when we design.
Adjustments have been made to the roadway alignment since the EAMR plans were shown to the CAC at the last meeting. Public input suggested pushing the alignment north where Pima County already owns land along a hill. The team made that change.
Q. What was the purpose of the realignment?
A. To avoid cutting into the hill, the team originally pushed the alignment south, but homeowners asked them to look at it again to avoid cutting into their property and removing trees. The team looked at five alternatives before choosing the option that made the least environmental impact.
Q. How much further north has the alignment been pushed?
A. About 20 feet.
Q. Does it cut into the bluff?
A. Yes, we will have to do some treatment of that cut and the CAC will be shown the plans for that when they are developed.
Q. How do you imagine it will be treated?
A. The plans could include some type of surface treatment on the retaining wall or they could simulate a natural looking cut there, but the plans are not developed yet.
Q. If you made a recommendation to put in a retaining wall, would you put in a concrete form wall or something like on Skyline?
A. We anticipated something like on Skyline or River, but those plans have not been developed yet. The engineering team noted that in some places, the cut or wall could be as high as 20 feet and in other places 4 or 5 feet, but it is too early to tell definitively. When those plans have been developed, they will be shown to the CAC.
Q. Would you give us a brief overview of how the road alignment has changed near Rio Vista from the original plan?
A. The roadway section is reduced in width and we will be talking with the property owner within the next three or four weeks. The curb line has moved away from the property line, and they are not taking the parking area.
Q. What about the raised roadway?
A. The rise is so small that it will be nearly undetectable.
Mr. Buckley commented that Pima County had just received 38 proposals from artists to be considered on this project. An artist selection panel is being formed encompassing four people from the community; one from Pima County, one from the design team and two or three members from the Arts Council had been planned. The artist will be selected within the next four to six weeks and the CAC will receive updates.
Q. Is there anyone from the CAC on the artist selection committee?
A. Yes, there will be four people from the community on the committee and three of them are on the CAC.
Q. What about the removal of the power poles and overhead power lines?
A. Pima County does not have enough money in the budget to relocate the utilities underground.
Q. How much money is budgeted for the public art part of this project?
A. $107,000 for River Road and $92,000 for Alvernon Way.
Q. Does it have to be applied to public art instead of getting rid of the overhead utility lines?
A. Yes, that is Mr. Buckley’s understanding.
Q. The CAC and interested parties would prefer to spend the money on putting the utilities underground.
A. That is so noted.
Q. Are the utility poles being moved?
A. The poles will need to be relocated but it is too expensive to move them underground.
Q. It seems that this section of River is not getting the same treatment as previous sections, which got underground utilities and walls, etc. $100,000 for this work does not seem like very much money.
A. It is 1% of the budget as it was on other parts of River Road.
Q. Is there any other way to raise money for underground utilities, or is it a dead issue?
A. The project does not have the money now, so it is unlikely that the County can do it.
Comment from an Interested Party: The neighborhood can create a road improvement district to tax themselves to raise the money. If there is strong enough interest, there are ways to do that.
Q. Will there be an opportunity to comment on art as it is proposed?
A. Yes, the CAC members are to review the art and comment, and anyone who wishes to be invited as an interested party to the CAC meetings can be included on the list and comment.
One of the elements that the CAC has wanted to consider is provision for alternative modes of transportation. Pima Trails has some plans for paths that will be incorporated into the design. In the roadway areas where there are curbs, there will be sidewalks on both sides right along the curb. At Hacienda del Sol, there is a large development being planned and the team will be coordinating with the City regarding that area. The developer has provided an equestrian access to the river park with an equestrian easement. A drainage ditch has been proposed along the Hacienda del Sol wash, allowing another access point. There will be no equestrian access at Roger due to traffic there.
At the intersection of River Road, Alvernon Way near the future County park, there will be a path or trail starting and some pedestrian walkways.
Feedback was sought on the area from Hacienda del Sol to the River Bend area regarding pedestrian access and the addition, location and materials for sidewalks. There will be several access points to the River Park along that area.
Q. Are the 6-foot shoulders considered bicycle lanes?
A. Yes.
Q. Will there be a traffic signal at the intersection of Hacienda del Sol?
A. Yes. The project has signals on River Road at Alvernon, Dodge and Hacienda del Sol.
Q. Will there be a temporary traffic signal at Hacienda del Sol?
A. More than likely, yes, depending on the schedule of the new development at Hacienda del Sol and River Road and the schedule of Pima County’s construction on River Road.
Q. What kind of a signal will be at the access point for the frontage road?
A. That will not be a signalized intersection. There will be a stop sign at the frontage road where you can turn left or right.
Q. They may be considering a signal at the intersection of Pontatoc and River. Can the signal at Alvernon and River be sequenced with that one? The intersection at Alvernon and River is becoming a problem.
A. Mr. Buckley will pass along that request to Ken Shackman in Pima County’s Traffic Engineering Division. A comment sheet with that inquiry was requested in order to pass it along to Traffic Control.
Q. What about a traffic control signal at North Alvernon and River the way it is aligned today – would that be outside this project?
A. Yes.
Q. Is there any plan for electronic video surveillance for speed control enforcement and is there any potential for that in this project?
A. Please provide a comment to that effect so it can be considered and evaluated. There may be some Intelligent Transportation solutions available and the team is considering it for various uses including possibly warning signals for flooding or road conditions.
Q. Has there been any more discussion about water lines?
A. Yes, Tucson Water is proposing a 12-inch line along the whole project. The team also spoke to Tucson Water about a reclaimed (gray water) irrigation line. There are several reclaimed water lines across the project, and they will utilize that water in some way.
Q. Has anyone looked at the drainage at Roger?
A. Yes, the team has looked at it extensively with provisions for handling all storms with the exception of a 100-year storm.
Q. What is the timing for this whole project now?
A. The design team should be finished with the design plans in March of 2004 and the County is hoping to begin construction in the summer of 2004. Mr. Buckley noted that the current team has only been working on this project since November.
Q. Are the funds available to go into construction as soon as the design phase is over?
A. The bond program has been stretched out because of funding issues, but River Road is a project the County feels it is important to complete because of heavier traffic. Therefore, the plan is to start at the scheduled time. Alvernon Way is also on schedule at this time, but Mr. Buckley noted that he could not speak for the City.
Q. Is it correct that there will not be sound walls for noise abatement?
A. Noise walls affect the character of the area and the CAC did not feel they would be acceptable abatement. There are noise abatement guidelines that must be followed and the team will make sure that they are met. A study done indicated that the noise levels would be within the acceptable levels.
Q. Is that study available?
A. Yes, they can make it available – it is in the EAMR and the team will try to post it on the web site.
Q. Are you considering rubberized asphalt?
A. Yes, this project will use rubberized asphalt, which will reduce much of the noise.
Q. Is there any consideration of eliminating trucks over a certain size?
A. No, Pima County does not typically do that on County roads.
Q. Weren’t the sound tests done with ordinary traffic? Once the road is completed there will be 18-wheelers where there were not before. Can the study recalculate?
A. The noise study did include trucks, and the EAMR will be posted on the web site for review. Mr. Buckley asked that those concerned about this issue fill out comment forms and keep the team posted on their concerns.
Q. Does the team have any information from the City about their plans to connect the bridge at Alvernon?
A. The team will bring that information to the CAC at the next meeting. They expect that project design to begin within the next two or three months, but they will have to confirm that with the City.
Q. Will the bridge at Dodge be removed?
A. For this project, they are not proposing to remove the Dodge bridge. The City of Tucson will decide what they wish to do with that bridge at a later date.
Q. What is the status of the ball field lighting?
A. Mr. Buckley has no definitive information on that from Parks and Recreation at this time.
Comment from CAC: Right now, the River Bend Park has been put on hold, but they clearly know that the CAC does not want lighted soccer fields there.
Q. Is it fair to say that at this point the team does not know how much this project will cut into private property?
A. We have a good idea, but the existing property lines are not completely determined yet. In September or October, they should have better information and can start talking to individual members. At that time, Jan Gordley will be setting up meetings with individual property owners involved.
Q. What consideration has been given to the Montessori School across the street, which contains the original Mormon schoolhouse? Is that intersection being improved so people can tour the original schoolhouse?
A. There has been no change to the scope of work regarding access to the school. That location is planned to be treated as a driveway. The team knows there will be children there and will look at it.
Q. Is the entrance to Bank One at Campbell and River a done deal? It is difficult to get into the bank.
A. That section is finished, but please fill out a comment form and the team will try to get back to the speaker.
Q. The speaker lives near Country Club and River on the south side and they have already had their mail stolen and put in a locking mailbox. She is concerned about the increased traffic, and would like the area to be more protected.
A. The team will be looking at mail delivery issues with the 6’ paved shoulder and they will get back to her with decisions as they are formulated.
Mr. Buckley concluded the meeting and noted that team members would be available after the meeting to speak with attendees individually. Carmen Christy, a CAC member on the public art committee, also offered to stay to discuss art concerns. The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.