Document Moscow_doc_c04752af3c

Page 1 of 23 THIRD STREET BRIDGE AND CORRIDOR PROJECT September 2017 The lack of sufficient East/West connectivity has been recognized for many years as a significant challenge for the City of Moscow transportation network. The loss of existing and potential routes such as A Street, Spotswood Street, Eighth Street, and others has limited the options for East/West flow. A bridge across Paradise Creek at Third Street has been anticipated for decades and the design and construction of the surrounding facilities have reflected this. As the City continues to grow, most of the new population centers have been and are projected to be on the East side of the City. This makes it all the more critical that the City plan for and stay ahead of this growth, including developing the infrastructure necessary to accommodate increasing demand from all modes of transportation. DESIGN BRIDGE DESIGN The design of the new multimodal bridge will occur during the fall and winter of 2017/18 with an intent to advertise for bids for construction in the spring of 2018. A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) from qualified consulting engineering firms was first published on September 2, 2017. Selection of a design firm for the project is anticipated by the end of September with design work commencing in November. The Multimodal Bridge is proposed to include two vehicular travel lanes, two bicycle lanes, and two pedestrian sidewalks. The width of the bridge is likely to match the existing roadway width on both sides of Paradise Creek. The bridge elevation will be set in accordance with floodplain requirements and as low as possible to minimize impacts on surrounding properties, sidewalks, and driveways. The existing street on both sides of Paradise Creek was designed and constructed at elevations anticipated to accommodate future bridge construction. This is likely to minimize elevation discrepancies with surrounding properties. At this time, the City is not anticipating the need to acquire any additional street right of way, but confirmation of this situation will occur during the design process. CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT While bridge design is underway, City Staff will review the Third Street corridor from Washington Street to Mountain View Road regarding potential impacts and mitigation related to the anticipated changes in traffic patterns. This review is likely to include the following components: • Parking • Bicycle Facilities • Traffic Control /Stop Control • School Zones/Crossing Guards • Public Art • Sidewalks/Pedestrian Facilities • Speed Limits ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 2 of 23 It is anticipated that the assessment will result in the development of alternatives and recommendations for changes to the facilities along the Corridor. These alternatives and recommendations will be presented to the Transportation Commission for review and recommendation. These may include the installation of traffic calming features, completion of sidewalks, modifications to current traffic control devices, modifications to on-street parking, addition of bicycle facilities, and other related work. The extent and location of such modifications is not yet known, but will be developed during the fall and winter of 2017/18. PARKING The current on-street parking conditions within the Third Street corridor vary along its length. The following table summarizes the existing Third Street width and parking layout from Washington Street to Mountain View Road. Streets Street Width Parking Permitted? From To South Side North Side Washington Jefferson 54’ Yes Yes Jefferson Adams 52’ Yes Yes Adams Van Buren 40’ No Yes Van Buren Polk 30’ No Yes Polk Blaine 30’ Yes No Blaine Grant 36’ – 44’ Yes Yes Grant Mountain View 44’ Yes Yes The assessment of the corridor will include a review of the existing parking configuration. Past discussions by the Transportation Commission (June 2005) considered the option of removal of some parking from portions of Third Street between Hayes Street and Grant Street. At this time, the City has not anticipated changes in the parking configuration except as may be necessary to accommodate any selected traffic calming measures. BICYCLE FACILITIES In June 2016, the City Council adopted the 2016 Bike Routes and Facilities Plan. This was the culmination of several years of work by Staff, the Transportation Commission, and the MMTP consultant to develop a new on-street bicycle network for the City of Moscow. The Plan includes the installation of new facilities on Third Street between Washington Street and Mountain View Road. These include the following: Eastbound • Bike lane from Jefferson Street to Polk Street • Sharrows (Shared Lane) from Polk Street to Grant Street • Bike lane from Grant Street to Cleveland Street ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 3 of 23 Westbound • Bike lane from Cleveland Street to Grant Street • Sharrows (Shared Lane) from Grant Street to Van Buren Street • Bike lane from Van Buren Street to Jefferson Street After the 2017 Third Street Grind and Inlay project, Staff reviewed the Bike Routes and Facilities Plan in preparation for the re-striping of Third Street. It was determined that without removing existing parking on the north side of Third Street between Van Buren Street and Jefferson Street, a potentially unsafe condition would occur if the westbound bike lane was installed on the downhill section in close proximity to parked cars. Therefore, a change in the facility configuration was made to replace the downhill bike lane with sharrows and add a door buffer zone on the uphill westbound bike lane. These bike facilities were installed in early September. In addition, it was determined that the western terminus of the eastbound bike lane could be extended to Washington Street to provide a smoother transition for eastbound vehicular traffic. The remaining planned bike facilities on Third Street will be included in the corridor assessment to determine if any additional modifications are necessary. Installation of the remaining facilities is anticipated to occur in conjunction with other changes/modification in the corridor. TRAFFIC CONTROL/STOP CONTROL The current traffic control on Third Street from Washington Street to Mountain View Road consists of the following: • Traffic Signal at Washington Street • Two Way Stop control at Hayes Street • Stop Control at Mountain View Road All other intersections along the corridor have stop control on the side street approaches. The Corridor Assessment will include a review of the existing traffic control measures to determine if any changes are appropriate to address potential changes in traffic patterns. SCHOOL ZONE/ CROSSING GUARDS The current School Zone around Lena Whitmore Elementary School includes portions of Third Street and Blaine Street. Historically the School Zone boundary on Blaine Street was located just north of the Third Street intersection and the School Zone did not include any of Third Street. The School Zone was expanded in 2012 so that it starts on Blaine Street south of Third Street and includes Third Street from a point 150 feet west of Blaine (near Garfield Street) to a point about 250 feet east of Blaine. The Moscow School District provides crossing guards at the intersection of Blaine Street and Third Street. The existing School Zone location will be reviewed as part of the Corridor Assessment, but no changes to the School Zone or the crossing guard program are anticipated. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 4 of 23 SIDEWALKS/PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES The sidewalk system along Third Street is more complete than many of the streets of this nature in this part of town. A review of the existing walks performed in 2005 determined that between Hayes Street and Mountain View Drive there were four lots on the north side of the street and seven lots on the south side of the street that did not have sidewalks along their frontage. A field review of the topography along this segment of Third Street determined that it would not be too difficult to install these missing segments, and thus complete the sidewalk system in this area. A review of the current sidewalk system completeness and condition will be performed as part of the Corridor Assessment. It is anticipated that some sidewalk improvements may be recommended as part of the Corridor project to improve the sidewalk system connectivity. PUBLIC ART The City of Moscow requires that most above ground Public Works projects apply a minimum of 1% of the project cost to Public Art. This can be in the form of art incorporated into the project design and construction or can be a payment to the Arts Capital Program fund for the future installation of Public Art. SCHEDULE AND DESIGN SCHEDULE The preliminary anticipated schedule for the Third Street bridge project is as shown below. Actual completions dates for each phase of work will vary. Request for Qualifications from design firms published September 2017 Selection of design firm September/October 2017 Execution of design services contract October 2017 Consultant design services November 2017 – February 2018 Corridor enhancements assessment November 2017 – March 2018 Advertisement of project for construction bids March 2018 Award of Construction Contract April/May 2018 Construction of Bridge and Corridor Enhancements May 2018 – October 2018 DESIGN PROCESS/CONSULTANTS A consulting Engineering firm will be retained by the City of Moscow for the design of the Third Street bridge structure and associated improvements necessary for its construction. The City follows the State of Idaho Professional Services procurement statutes during selection of consulting firms. The process begins with the advertisement of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) which invites qualified engineering firms to submit a Statement of Qualifications (SOQ) indicating their interest in performing design services for the City and their expertise in such services. The RFQ for the Third Street bridge design was published in early September 2017. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 5 of 23 Interested firms will submit their SOQ documents to the City by September 22, 2017. A selection committee will review the submittals received and identify the preferred consultant based on past experience, qualifications of the design team, availability, and other factors. The selected firm will be requested to develop a project design scope of services and proposed fee. Upon successful negotiations with the selected firm, in November 2017 the City is expected to enter into a professional services contract for design and construction management services with the consultant. Once provided a signed contract and a notice to proceed by the City, the consultant will proceed with the design process with assistance from and management by the Moscow Public Works Department. Upon successful completion of the design, the consultant will assist the City with the advertisement for bids for the construction of the bridge project. It is anticipated that the consultant will also provide assistance to the City throughout the term of the construction project. CORRIDOR ASSESSMENT During the bridge design and bidding process staff will perform the Corridor Assessment to determine recommendations for other actions within the Third Street corridor. Areas of consideration may include on-street parking, bicycle facilities, traffic control, school zones, pedestrian facilities, speed limits, and adjacent land uses. FUNDING FISCAL YEAR 2018 BUDGET - BRIDGE The funding for the new Third Street Multimodal Bridge is derived from City of Moscow General Fund and Street Fund revenues. No additional grant, bond, or loan funding is proposed for the bridge construction project. The adopted FY2018 Budget includes $580,000 for the Third Street Multimodal Bridge in line item 350-150-40-770-49 of the Capital Projects Fund. FISCAL YEAR 2018 BUDGET – TRAFFIC CALMING ENHANCEMENTS Traffic calming and sidewalk improvements are anticipated to be funded from City of Moscow Sidewalk Program, Pavement Management Program, and other Capital Projects Fund revenues. HISTORY MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN The City of Moscow has long recognized its responsibility to address transportation needs throughout the community. This recognition has resulted in numerous programs, projects, and planning efforts to identify and implement transportation network improvements. The Comprehensive Land Use plans have included sections on mobility and transportation since the 1970’s. A Transportation Commission was formed in the late 1990’s to provide recommendations to the City Council regarding long range transportation issues. The Paradise Path Task Force (now Moscow Pathways Commission), Bike Commission, Active Living Task Force, Mobility Task Force, and other efforts have all contributed to a broader ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 6 of 23 understanding of the City’s desire for a complete multimodal transportation network to serve all users. A significant advancement in the overall transportation system planning efforts was completed in July 2014 in the form of the City’s first Multimodal Transportation Plan (MMTP) titled “Moscow on the Move”. Guiding principles and goals of the plan are reflected in the following excerpts: “Cultivating a balanced, sustainable, and efficient multimodal transportation system is a high-priority goal of the City of Moscow. This plan, Moscow on the Move, acts as an implementation tool for the policies established in the City of Moscow’s Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan, along with several prior planning efforts such the Downtown Revitalization Plan, seek to improve mobility options and opportunities to access Moscow’s wealth of cultural, retail, civic, and university destinations. Moscow on the Move will guide transportation investments within Moscow over the next 20 years by establishing policies and strategies that promote a range of attractive and viable transportation options.” “According to the 2012 Moscow Biannual Citizens Survey, most Moscow residents rate the quality of life in Moscow as “good” or “excellent.” Still, transportation issues are among the community’s key concerns. Residents have expressed interest in a wide range of mobility issues, from the level and quality of transit service and lack of bikeway connections to deficient street connections and sidewalk conditions. Ultimately, the City’s streets are one of Moscow’s most heavily utilized and most critical community assets. Moscow on the Move seeks to balance the competing needs of the city’s diverse travel markets and improve local quality of life through transportation investments. Although transportation plans are necessary for ensuring adherence to Idaho Code, there are many other reasons to develop a multi-modal transportation plan. For the City of Moscow, these include the following: • People desire transportation options and a variety of route options. • The recent adoption of MAP-21, the updated federal transportation bill, will likely add new challenges to funding transportation improvements in Moscow. This plan seeks to expand funding options and local partnerships to develop the transportation network of the future. • The cost of transportation is increasing due to rising fuel costs. Offering affordable travel options in a city with a large college student and elderly population is critical. • Many Moscow residents are physically active and are interested in expanding opportunities to walk and bicycle for transportation and recreation. • Moscow is competing on a national and global scale to attract new companies, talented workers, and new students and faculty. Developing streets that foster civic, retail, and social activity as well as vibrant, well connected neighborhoods is a key strategy to attract new business and support cultural vitality. • Moscow residents enjoy a healthy Paradise Creek and clean air. Greater emphasis on infrastructure that promotes the use of low impact modes of travel like walking, bicycling, public transit, and ridesharing, can limit the impact on local air quality, ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 7 of 23 water quality, and global climate change by reducing per capita tailpipe emissions and runoff. • To benefit from expanded opportunities for physical activity and active transportation, residents of all ages must feel comfortable and safe using Moscow’s streets, sidewalks, and pathways. Safe and inviting streets and clear connections to bicycle and pedestrian pathways are essential to encourage active living and recreation. • As Moscow residents age, the City must accommodate those who wish to age in place by providing mobility options for older adults. This will ensure senior populations are engaged, active, and independent. Moscow has a diversity of streets with varying levels of accommodation for walking, transit, and bicycles. Barriers like major arterials and topography can limit mobility options. Moscow on the Move aims to expand the availability of safe and efficient transportation options for Moscow’s residents, while addressing broader community issues.” TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION The Mayor and City Council created the Transportation Commission with the following charge: A. To provide advice and recommendations to the Mayor and City Council regarding intermodal transportation issues as directed with the goal of establishing a system of transportation and circulation within and around the City of Moscow that will make it possible for all people utilizing various modes of transportation to reach their destination safely and easily with minimum disturbance to adjacent uses. B. To recommend to the Mayor and the Council policies and programs with the objective of implementing transportation goals and objectives of the Moscow Comprehensive Plan. C. To advise the Mayor and City Council as to the long range transportation needs of the City, to provide advice on integrating various transportation elements including, but not limited to, motorized vehicular traffic, bicycle traffic, pedestrian traffic, rail, air travel and public transportation. Over the course of the last two decades the Commission has at various time discussed the subjects of the classification of Third Street and the installation of the Third Street bridge. A summary of these discussions, with excerpts from Commission minutes, follows: • December 14, 2000 – Discussed the width and classification of Third Street and potential impacts on B Street. “Reece moved that Third Street be considered an arterial street from Washington Street east to Mountain View Road. Tom Lamar said he would support it being an arterial west of Hayes Street. Sharon Feeley seconded the motion. Reece rephrased her motion to state that Third Street is an arterial from Washington Street to its ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 8 of 23 proposed terminus at D Street1. Feeley seconded the motion. Cook said that to him Mountain View Road to D Street is a collector street. Several Commission members suggested that 12-foot travel lanes would be appropriate for Third Street because: 10- or 11-foot lanes would require an exemption from federal standards, 12-foot lanes would allow for turning lanes to be included on the roadway in the future without necessitating moving the curbs, and 12-foot lanes would make the right- of-way needed for the roadway equal to 70 feet. Reece said she would characterize Third Street as a minor arterial, with two travel lanes, 12-foot each; two 5-foot bike lanes; two 8-foot parking lanes; a 1-foot curb; sidewalks on one side of the street, 6 feet in width; and a planting strip between the sidewalk and curb 8 feet in width. The total width would be 70 feet. That would be effective for Third Street from Washington Street to its terminus at D Street1. The vote on the motion was 4-2 for approval. Lamar said the bridge needs to be built to meet these standards and must meet flood plain requirements.” • April 28, 2005 – Discussed potential traffic calming measures along the Third Street corridor which could be considered if the Third Street bridge was installed. No recommendations made. • June 23, 2005 – Discussed potential issues related to a new Third Street bridge including sidewalks, lots without sidewalks, east/west traffic, pedestrians, street widths, parking, and funding. “Schutz made a motion that the Commission recommended a crossing be constructed over Paradise Creek at Third Street. Reece seconded.....Schutz amended the motion to include that parking be stripped from the south side of Third Street between Hayes and Grant, that additional sidewalks be constructed to create continuous sidewalks on both sides of Third Street from Hayes to Mountain View Road, that the Public Works Department investigate and implement some form of traffic mediation for pedestrians at Blaine and Cleveland Streets (pedestrian actuated lights, four way stop, traffic light, etc.) and to investigate LHTAC for possible funding options for this project.” • December 20, 2007 – Discussed the classification of Third Street. “Belknap brought up the Third Street classification with the bridge. Council passed a resolution that 3rd Street be a neighborhood collector. Steed asked if the question was whether 3rd should be a collector or arterial. Cook stated that if it has been made a collector then leave it as a collector all the way to Roosevelt Street. La Pointe stated that Third Street narrows, he suggested that they be careful how much traffic they direct by East City Park as the park neighborhood is worthy of preservation. MacDonald stated that once you cross Adams Street, Third Street is a 30 foot width going to 34 feet at Blaine Street than 44 feet all the way to Grant Street. Belknap asked what effect it would have on funding. MacDonald stated that it will need to be designated a collector. Carscallen feels that it should remain a collector street. Steed asked if they were in agreement that Third Street should remain a collector. Cook 1 Third Street, east of Mountain View Road, is platted to turn to the north, meeting D Street to the north. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 9 of 23 stated that the intersection of Roosevelt could end the collector designation. MacDonald agrees that it should remain a collector. There was additional discussion about the arterial vs. collector designation. Cook asked if there is a point when the Commission will have a final review of the Comprehensive Plan and the map. Belknap agreed that they would be able to review it again. The Commission agreed to leave Third Street as a collector to Roosevelt.” • July 10, 2008 – Discussed the classification of Third Street as a collector vs. minor arterial. “Cook stated that the Commission will be reviewing the draft thoroughfare plan map. Belknap indicated that it is the same map developed by Transportation Commission during the ring road discussion with the exception of Third Street from Washington to Mountain View Road that had been designated as a minor arterial. There was discussion about the similarities of Sixth Street and Third Street. Johnson stated that Third Street was a principal arterial and he asked if another arterial need to be three blocks away from Sixth Street. Cook asked about differences between arterials and collectors in a residential area. MacDonald stated that the one distinction is that the City does not allow backing from lots onto minor arterials in new developments. Cook stated that retrofitting established areas is difficult and maybe minor arterials through residential areas in older parts of town should be called collectors. MacDonald stated that as a general rule speed limit tends to be higher on minor arterials. MacDonald asked if the Commission was comfortable showing Third Street as a collector, which is the current classification. Members agreed, with La Pointe stating that if making Third Street a collector allows for a road bridge over Paradise Creek, he is not in favor.” • February 13, 2014 – Discussed the proposed update to the Urban Area and Functional Classification map which included Third Street as a minor arterial from Washington Street to Mountain View Road. “MacDonald spoke about the Urban Area and Functional Classification map. The Transportation Commission talked about the map back in 2002. The map is used primarily by the City and ITD. The map comes into play for receiving funding from the State. Funding operations, Street Classifications, Street Standards and different Classifications, whether or not there should be parking all goes back to this map. The last time the map was updated was in 2003. The City is currently working on updating the map. There was a group discussion on how the map is used what changes are going to be made. MacDonald said that the map needs to go to ITD fairly soon. Action: Johnson moved and Dupree seconded to accept the Functional Classification Map.” • October 29, 2015 – Discussed the history and past discussions regarding the Third Street bridge. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 10 of 23 “MacDonald spoke about the history of the Third Street bridge and went through previous Transportation Commission minutes and explained the actions that had taken place at previous meetings. In 2000, the Transportation Commission considered Third Street to be a minor arterial. In 2005, the Transportation Commission recommended parking being stripped from the South side of Third Street between Hayes and Grant, additional sidewalks be constructed to create continuous sidewalks on both sides of Third Street from Hayes to Mountain View Road. MacDonald added that there were other comments about the project from the Historic Preservation Commission and the Paradise Path Task Force. There was a discussion on the Third Street bridge during the Windfall Hills Subdivision. Moscow Multimodal Transportation Plan addressed the bridge and the Council adopted the plan in July 2014. MacDonald went through the funding history of the bridge. MacDonald stated that the dollar amount from the Multimodal Transportation Plan was $1,100,000 for the full bridge and $500,000 to $700,000 depending on how far the project would go. There was a discussion among members. Hamilton moved to recommend that the Transportation Commission supports action RT2 from the Moscow Multimodal Transportation Plan. If the bridge will take more than 8 years for construction then an interim bicycle pedestrian bridge should be constructed within 2 or 3 years. The design and implementation should not preclude a vehicle bridge be forwarded to Council and Meyers seconded. Roll Call Vote: Ayes: Seven. Nays: One. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.” PUBLIC INPUT HISTORY There have been numerous occasions for public input regarding the classification of Third Street and the installation of a Third Street bridge over Paradise Creek. These have included multiple Transportation, Paradise Path Task Force, and Historic Preservation Commission meetings, Public Works/Finance Committee meetings, and City Council meetings. In addition, the development of the “Moscow on the Move” Multimodal Transportation Plan (MMTP) included concerted outreach efforts regarding all facets of transportation within the City of Moscow. This took the form of on-line surveys, on-bus transit surveys, stakeholder meetings, open houses, Social Media (Facebook & Twitter), and community workshops held at One World Café. TRAFFIC MODEL As part of the development of the MMTP, the consultant team created a traffic model for the City of Moscow. This model used industry standards for software, trip generation, peak demand multipliers, existing system calibration, and planning horizon volume estimation. The model was used to assess near and long term traffic impacts throughout the City, with specific modeling related to the Third Street bridge and the ring road concept. An excerpt from the MMTP addressing the modeling of the Third Street bridge proposal is attached as Exhibit A ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 11 of 23 SPEED LIMITS AND HISTORY Speed limits along the Third Street corridor appear to have been officially set by the City on December 16, 1974 as part of Ordinance No. 1272. This ordinance established the authority of the City Engineer to set speed limits and identified minimum and maximum speeds. The ordinance was the culmination of a city-wide speed study completed in 1974. As part of that study, speed limits were recommended for select streets ranging from 30 mph to 55 mph. All other streets were set at 25 mph. The attached Exhibit B includes portions of the study document. The recommended speed for Third Street between Van Buren Street and Hayes Street was 30 mph. The remainder of Third Street was recommended to have a 25 mph limit. The current posted speed limit for Third Street is 25 mph from Washington Street to Van Buren Street where it changes to 30 mph. The limit then then drops back to 25 mph east of Hayes Street. In reviewing Google Earth Street View back to 2007 these limits and locations have remained unchanged. It appears that they have been implemented as recommended by the 1974 speed study. PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE RESOLUTION - 2007 On December 3, 2007 the City Council approved Resolution 2007-30 pertaining to a pedestrian bridge over Paradise Creek at Third Street. The Resolution stated the following: The City of Moscow endorses the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle/disabled access bridge on Third Street over Paradise Creek at the eastern terminus of the street west of Mountain View Road, with adjacent landscaping and accommodating the Paradise Path and amenities to the extent possible within the City's right of way at the intersection of the Creek and Third Street, 2. Third Street shall remain classified as a neighborhood collector to preserve and enhance the central historic neighborhood of Moscow and conserve the safety and accessibility of schools, East City Park and other public facilities and services located adjacent to Third Street. 3. This resolution will be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage and approval by the City Council.” The passage of this Resolution followed input from citizens interested in a pedestrian bridge across the creek and proposals that the bridge could be funded by donations from the community. The City began accepting donations for the pedestrian bridge in December 2007. The last donation received by the City was submitted on October 21, 2008. In all, the City received $7,730 in donations. Some donations had previously been refunded at the request of the donating party. In August 2017, the City Council approved refunding the remaining donations it had received for the Third Street pedestrian bridge, to be accomplished after October 1, 2017 the beginning of the City’s next fiscal year. HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY The Fort Russell Historic District is located to the north of the Third Street corridor. The current District boundary is shown in the attached Exhibit C. The southernmost edge of the existing District is located along the north side of Second Street between Adams Street and ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 12 of 23 Polk Street. A revision to the Fort Russell Historic District boundary has been proposed and is currently under review at a Federal level. A decision on the proposed change is anticipated during September 2017. The revised area is as shown on the attached Exhibit D. The southernmost edge of the proposed boundary is along the north right of way line of Third Street between Jefferson Street and Hayes Street. The Third Street corridor does not pass through the District. STREET CLASSIFICATIONS The 2010 Urban Area and Functional Classification Map (approved 2003) designated Third Street from Washington Street to Mountain View Road as an existing collector arterial. The extension of Third Street east of Mountain View Road was designated as a proposed (future) collector arterial. During the period from 2003 to 2010 the Transportation Commission identified future extensions of City collector arterials and minor arterials, defined the proposed Ring Road alignment, and considered changes to the street classifications throughout the City. In 2014, the Commission recommended approval of an update to the Urban Area and Functional Classification Map that included Third Street as a minor arterial between Washington Street and Mountain View Road. The Multimodal Transportation Plan (MMTP), adopted by the City Council in July 2014, includes this recommendation as illustrated in Figure 4-7 (attached Exhibit In a transportation network the size of Moscow’s there are few differences between the characteristics of the minor arterial and collector arterial classifications. The City’s adopted Street Standards require the following components for each of the classifications. Standard Collector Arterial Minor Arterial Right of Way Width (min.) 70’ 90’ Street Width (min.) 34’ 34’ Sidewalk Width (min.) 5’ 6’ (Res.) & 8’ (Comm./Ind. Number of Vehicle Lanes 2 2 Bike Lanes – Width (min.) Yes – 5’ Yes – 5’ In practice, the City requires that these standards be met during the construction of new street extensions. For existing street segments, the City works with the existing street cross section if it has been previously constructed to include curb and sidewalks. If these components are missing the City attempts to comply with the adopted standards within the confines of the existing right of way. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 13 of 23 EXHIBITS ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 14 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 15 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 16 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 17 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 18 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 19 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 20 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 21 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 22 of 23 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 23 of 23 REFERENCES City of Moscow. (1974). City of Moscow 1974 Speed Study. Moscow, Idaho. City of Moscow. (all years, all public meetings). Public Meeting Files. Retrieved from Public Meeting Files - City Council, Transportation Commission, and others: http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/records/Pages/default.aspx City of Moscow. (2017). Fort Russell Historic District Reconnaissance Survey and Potential District Expansion. Moscow, Idaho. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/commissions/Pages/Historic-Fort-Russell.aspx City of Moscow. (2014). City of Moscow Standard Construction Drawings. Moscow, Idaho. Retrieved from City of Moscow - Standard Construction Drawings: http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/records/Planning%20%20Guides/Standard%20Drawings.pdf City of Moscow. (2017). FY2018 Budget. Moscow, Idaho. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/records-center/budget Kendig Keast Collaborative. (2009). City of Moscow Comprehensive Plan. Moscow, Idaho: City of Moscow. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/planning/Pages/comp-plan.aspx Nygaard, Associates, & Design, A. P. (2014). Moscow Multi-Modal Transportation Plan. Moscow, Idaho: City of Moscow. Retrieved from: http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/records/Publications/MotM- Final%20Moscow%20on%20the%20Move.pdf#search=multi%2Dmodal%20transportation%20p lan