Close the GAP / The City of Asheville, NC

Page 1

C L O S E T H E G A P / City of Asheville, NC Greenway Plan ADA Transition Plan Pedestrian Plan

Draft April 2022


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S 1 THE VISION ����������������������������������������������������������������������1

Targeted Work Sessions ����������������������������������������������������������������������47

Introduction ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3

City Task Force & Commission Presentations �������������47

Close the GAP �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������3

Community Surveys ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������47

Vision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3

Broad Community Feedback Survey ������������������������������������������47

The Results ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4

Intercept Surveys ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51

Greenway Plan (G) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6

Project Network Survey �����������������������������������������������������������������������52

ADA Transition Plan (A) �������������������������������������������������������������������������7 Pedestrian Plan (P) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������7 Connecting to the Vision ���������������������������������������������������������������������� 9 Equity Statement �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10

Policy Framework at a Glance ��������������������������������������������������������12 Vision �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������12 Goals ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������12 Recommended Actions �������������������������������������������������������������������������13

Final Community Opinion Survey �������������������������������������������������52

Public Meetings ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 54 Photo & Video Campaign ����������������������������������������������������������������� 54 Additional Engagement Strategies ����������������������������������������� 54

4 HOW WE GOT HERE ����������������������������������������������� 55 The Birth of a Project �����������������������������������������������������������������������������57 Corridor Approach ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 58 Destination + Equity Score �������������������������������������������������������������� 58

2 WHERE WE ARE TODAY ���������������������������������������17

Connectivity Score ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������62

Community Overview ����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19

Safety Score ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 64

Demographics �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 Jobs and Housing ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������24

Network Overview ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������24

Results ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66

Project Categories Plan Identification �������������������������������� 68 Assign to a Primary Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������� 68

Transportation Network �����������������������������������������������������������������������26

How it All Comes Together �������������������������������������������������������������� 68

Greenway Network ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������26

Network Confirmation ������������������������������������������������������������������������ 68

Pedestrian Network ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������28

Project Development & Recommendations ����������������������� 69

Other Network Considerations ������������������������������������������������������ 30

What you need to know about roadway maintenance and funding requirements ����������������������������������������������������������������� 72

Current Walking Rates ���������������������������������������������������������������������������35 Strava ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35

5 GREENWAY (G) PLAN AND RESULTS ������ 75

U.S. Census ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35

Overview �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77

Short-Duration Pedestrian Counts ����������������������������������������������36

Step 1: Refine Previously Planned Greenway Alignments �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77

Long-Duration Pedestrian Counts ���������������������������������������������� 38 Relevant Local, Regional and State Plans ����������������������������� 38

Reviewing the 2013 Greenway Master Plan For Feasibility ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 77

3 THE COMMUNITY VOICE ����������������������������������41

Step 2: Identify New Greenway Corridors �������������������������78

A Note About COVID-19 ����������������������������������������������������������������������43

Step 3: Define and Assign New Typologies (Types) ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 80

Core Engagement Strategy ��������������������������������������������������������������43 Think Tank Team (TTT) �������������������������������������������������������������������������45

Network Recommendations and Prioritization ����������� 88

Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) ������������������������������������������45

Network Recommendations ������������������������������������������������������������ 88

ADA Focus Group �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������45

More on Project Development Next Steps: ������������������������ 88

Asheville Unpaved Alliance ���������������������������������������������������������������45


Next Steps to the Neighborhood Greenway Program ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 96

6 THE ADA TRANSITION PLAN (A) SUMMARY ���������������������������������������������������������������������������129

Develop a Neighborhood Greenway Plan and Signage Guide �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 96

What is the ADA Transition Plan For the Public Rights-of-Way? ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������131

Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Recommendations � 96 Step 4: The Prioritization Process and Results ��������100 Factors Determining Project Priorities ����������������������������������100 Public Input Summary �����������������������������������������������������������������������100

Top 10 Priority Greenway Projects for the City of Asheville ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������102 1 / Swannanoa Greenway (Greenway Spine) ����������������������102 2 / Beaucatcher Greenway (Arterial Greenway) ���������������102 3 / Reed Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) �����������������102 4 / French Broad River Greenway North (NRADTIP) (Greenway Spine) �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������102 5 / Hominy Creek Greenway East (Greenway Spine) �� 103 6 / West Asheville Rail-with-Trail Greenway and Deaverview Connector (Greenway Spine) ��������������������������� 103 7 / Hendersonville Road Multi-use Path and Jake Rusher Greenway (Arterial Greenways) �������������������������������� 103

The ADA Self Evaluation ��������������������������������������������������������������������133 Review of Policies and Practices ������������������������������������������������133 Review Infrastructure Needs ���������������������������������������������������������133 Methodology and Approach ����������������������������������������������������������134 The Corridor Approach ���������������������������������������������������������������������134

More about the ADA ����������������������������������������������������������������������������136 The ADA and its Relationship to Other Laws ���������������136 What are the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)? ����������������������������������������������������������������������136

ADA Transition Plan Project Development Process ��������������������������������������������������������������������������137 Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 �������������������������������� 137 Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 137 Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category ���������������������������������� 137

8 / Rhododendron Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 103

Step 4. Project Development & Recommendations ����138

9 / South Asheville Rail-with-Trail/Sweeten Creek Road Greenway (Spine and Arterial Greenways) ������������������������� 103

Step 5. Public Input Round 3 ������������������������������������������������������� 140

10 / Smith Mill Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 103

NCDOT Greenway (Multi-use Paths) Projects Prioritization ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 105 NCDOT Projects and Corridor Studies that Include Greenway Elements ����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 105

Swannanoa River Greenway ��������������������������������������������������������� 108 Beaucatcher Greenway ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 110 Reed Creek Greenway ��������������������������������������������������������������������������112 French Broad Greenway (North RADTIP) ������������������������� 114 Hominy Creek Greenway ������������������������������������������������������������������� 116 West Asheville Rail-with-Trail & Deaverview Connector �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 118 Hendersonville Road Multi-Use Path & Jake Rusher Greenway ������������������������������������������������������������������������120 Rhododendron Creek Greenway �����������������������������������������������122 South Asheville Rail-with-Trail & Sweeten Creek Road ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������124 Smith Mill Creek Greenway ������������������������������������������������������������126

How to Implement the Corridor Approach ��������������������������139

7 THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN (P) RESULTS �� 151 Project Identification �������������������������������������������������������������������������153 Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 ��������������������������������153 Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������153 Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category ����������������������������������154 Step 4: Project Development & Recommendations ����154 Step 5: Public Input Round 3 ��������������������������������������������������������155

More on Pedestrian Facility Selection ������������������������������� 164 Competing Needs and Complete Streets Resources � 164 Resources for Complete Streets �������������������������������������������������165

Roadway Crossing Treatment Selection ��������������������������� 168 Guides for Improvement Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations ���������������������������������������������� 168

Project Elements for People Walking ����������������������������������� 172 Traffic Calming ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 172 Decorative Crosswalks ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 172 Access to Transit ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 173 Accessibility for All ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 173


8 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & NEXT STEPS ����������������������������������������������������������������177 Beyond Preliminary Planning �������������������������������������������������������179 Fine Tuning the Process �������������������������������������������������������������������181 What to Expect �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������183 Project Development When NCDOT or Federal Funds are Involved ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 184

9 DESIGN & POLICY �������������������������������������������������187 Introduction ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������189 Design Standards & Policy Review Tasks ������������������������189 Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Findings and Recommendations ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 190 Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) Findings and Recommendations ������������������������ 190 Targeted Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations �������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 Special Focus Areas ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 Questions for Each Category �������������������������������������������������������� 191 CATEGORIES �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 191 External Policy and NCDOT Coordination Findings ������195 Other Resources and Design Standards �������������������������������197

10 TAKE ACTION ����������������������������������������������������������199 Organizational & Partner Framework �����������������������������������201 Asheville City Council �������������������������������������������������������������������������201 City Staff �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������201 French Broad River MPO ������������������������������������������������������������������201 Buncombe County & Neighboring Jurisdictions �������������201 NCDOT Division 13 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������202 NCDOT Integrated Mobility Division ���������������������������������������202 Developers �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������202 Non-Profit Partners �����������������������������������������������������������������������������202 Community Members �������������������������������������������������������������������������202

The Action Plan �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������202

APPENDICES ������������������������������������������������������������������� 223


I N D E X O F F IG U R E S , I M AG E S , M A P S & TA B L E S FIGURES Figure 1. Not All People Can (or Want to) Drive. ������������� 10 Figure 2. Asheville Population by Gender and Age. �����21 Figure 3. Types of Disabilities in the City of Asheville. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������22 Figure 4. Combining Housing and Vehicle Cost, We Begin to Understand the True Cost of Living in Asheville. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������23 Figure 5. Analysis of Where People are Starting Their Work Commute Trips. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������24 Figure 6. The Lifecycle of a Pedestrian and Bicycle Project. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������26 Figure 7. How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built. ������28

Figure 21. A Portion of the Soon to be Constructed Swannanoa River Greenway. ���������������������������������������������������������������102 Figure 22. Components of Complete Streets. ��������������� 164 Figure 23. Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology Process). �����������������������������������������������������������������������������166 Figure 24. Facility Selection Matrix ������������������������������������������167 Figure 25. Steps Involved for Selecting Counter-measures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������169 Figure 26. Standard Contingency Methodology ������������181 Figure 27. How to Get Roads Built �������������������������������������������� 184 Figure 28. NCDOT Transportation Planning Process ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 185

Figure 8. Previous City of Asheville Planning Documents Reviewed for Close the GAP. ��������������������������������39 Figure 9. General Gap Survey Results ������������������������������������� 48 Figure 10. ADA Survey Results �������������������������������������������������������� 50

IMAGES

Figure 11. Project Network Survey Demographics Summary. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������52

Image 1 / Neighborhood Greenway Showing a Small Roundabout and Facilities that Prioritize Bicyclists and Pedestrians. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6

Figure 12. Additional Engagement Strategies Including StoryMaps, Online Surveys, and Social Media Promotional Materials. ������������������������������������������������������������ 54 Figure 13. The Following Three Factors Guided the Creation of Projects for Close the Gap. ������������������������������������57 Figure 14. The Five Categories of Pedestrian Connectivity: Primary Spine, Secondary Spine, Major Collector, Minor Collector and Local/Neighborhood Connections. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������62

Image 2 / Traditional Greenway in Asheville.

�������������������� 6

Image 3 / Eugene, OR Neighborhood Greenway Signage. ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6 Image 4 / Navigating Our City with a Wheelchair is a Challenge. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������7 Image 5 / Example of a Missing Curb Ramp. ����������������������7 Image 6 / Curb Ramp and a Crosswalk. ������������������������������������7

Figure 15. The Tiers of Projects as Defined by Combined Scores. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 66

Image 7 / Worn Pathways, or Goat Trails, Indicate Where Sidewalks May be Needed. �������������������������������������������������� 8

Figure 16. Transportation Planning Process: Pre-design Steps for State and Federally Funded Projects. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 72

Image 8 / Constructing New Sidewalks is More than just a Sidewalk - Wood Avenue. Required a New Retaining Wall. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 8

Figure 17. Asheville’s New Greenway Types, Including Spine Greenways, Arterial Greenways, Neighborhood Greenways and Natural Surface Trails. �������������������������������������� 81

Image 9 / New Sidewalk Constructed through a New Development Project. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 8

Figure 19. Arterial Spine Typology ���������������������������������������������� 85

Image 10 / Where the French Broad River West Greenway meets a sidewalk, bicycle facility, a bus stop and a street is a great example of a multimodal network. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������25

Figure 20. Next Steps Project Development Definitions Referenced in Tables X-X ���������������������������������������� 88

Image 11 / The First Meeting of the Think Tank Team in December 2019. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������45

Figure 18. Greenway Spine Typology �����������������������������������������83


Image 12 / The First Meeting of the Community Advisory Committee in January 2020. ��������������������������������������45 Image 13 / Chalk Art Advertising the Greenway Intercept Survey in the River Arts District. ���������������������������� 51 Image 14 / Linda Glitz with Connect Buncombe Interviewing a Woman in the River Arts District. ������������ 51 Image 15 / Based on Connectivity Scoring, Hendersonville Road Has a Higher Connectivity Score (5) than Joyner Street (3). �����������������������������������������������������������������������62 Image 16 / Based on Criteria and Rating Methodology, Murdock Ave in North Asheville Had the Lowest Safety Score (1) While Patton Ave Had the Highest Possible Safety Score (7). ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 64

Image 30 / Curb Ramp Elements �������������������������������������������������139 Image 31 / Watauga Street in Montford is an Example of a Sidewalk with an ADA Condition Rating of 5 - In Poor Condition. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������139 Image 32 / Audible Push Buttons that are Properly Positioned are Essential for Individuals with Disabilities to be able to Cross Busy Streets. �������������������142 Image 33 / Example of Preferred Curb Ramp Configuration for Individuals in Wheelchairs and with Vision Impairments. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������142 Image 34 / Example of Steep Driveway Cross Slope on Tunnel Road. Anything Over 2% is Non-compliant and can be a Barrier for Travel. �������������������������������������������������������142

Image 17 / Recommendations for Brevard Road in West Asheville Include ADA Upgrades to the Existing Sidewalk and a New Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68

Image 35 / Roundabout Crossings are Challenging for Those with Vision Impairments; Treatments such as Signals and Flashing Beacons with Audible Messages can Help. ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������142

Image 18 / Hendersonville Road Corridor Study Rendering Showing a Planned Multi-use Sidepath With the Existing Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68

Image 36 / Example of Temporary Ramp used to Maintain Access through a Temporary Work Zone. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������143

Image 19 / The French Broad Greenway Near New Belgium Brewing is an Example of a Spine Greenway. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������78

Image 37 / Example of Utility Poles and Other Obstacles in PAR Merrimon Avenue. ������������������������������������������143 Image 38 / Example of a Sidewalk in Poor Repair that Creates and Obstacle. �����������������������������������������������143

Image 20 / Street Redesign is a Component of Implementing Neighborhood Greenways. ��������������������������97

Image 39 / Example of Curb Ramp on Charlotte Street in Need of Better Drainage. ���������������������������������������������143

Image 21 / Proposed West Asheville Greenway as part of I-26 Connector Project. ����������������������������������������������������������������� 105

Image 40 / Signs in the Sidewalk Create an Obstacle on Merrimon Avenue. ������������������������������������������������������143

Image 22 / Hendersonville Road Proposed Multi-use Path (After) south of Long Shoals Road Entering the City of Asheville. ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 106

Image 41 / Vertical Clearance Requirements Ensure Visually Impaired Pedestrians can Navigate without Injury. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������143

Image 23 / A Person with a Vision Impairment Trying to Navigate the Public Right-of-Way. ����������������������������������������131

Image 42 / The City Maintains Most Streets in Downtown Asheville like Haywood Street and Battery Park Avenue. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������153

Image 24 / Examples of Public Right-of-Way Include Streets, Sidewalks, Crossings, Pedestrian Signals and Bus Stops, Among Others. ��������������������������������������������������������������������133

Image 43 / A Pedestrian Crossing at a Location with a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) �����������������155

Image 25 / A Common Practice for Reviewing Infrastructure for ADA Compliance is a Detailed Inventory of Slope and Dimension of the Right-ofWay. �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������134

Image 44 / Some of Asheville’s Busiest Corridors, like Tunnel Road, have a Myriad of Overlapping Land Use, Safety and Transportation Needs that Require a Detailed Study. �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������155

Image 26 / People with Disabilities Navigating Asheville’s Public Right-of-Way. ������������������������������������������������������135

Image 45 / Recently Upgraded Transit Stop on Tunnel Road That Needs Additional Crossing Treatments. ����173

Image 27 / Art Installation Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the ADA Law ����������������������������������������������������������������136

Image 46 / Unimproved Bus Stop on Tunnel Road Which is One of the Most Heavily Used Transit Corridors in the City. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������173

Image 28 / Patton Avenue is one of the Highest Scoring ADA Projects for City Maintained Streets �������138 Image 29 / Tunnel Road, Near the VA is One of the Highest Scoring ADA Projects for NCDOT Maintained Streets ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������138

Image 47 / These Guidelines Propose Accessibility Guidance for the Design, Construction and Alteration of Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way ����174

/

GAP Plan

/// 227


Image 48 / Staff at Work on Sidewalk Upgrades in Asheville. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������179 Image 49 / A Sample Image and Table from Asheville’s Standards and Design Manual. ����������������������� 190 Image 50 / Temporary Traffic Control while RADTIP was Under Development �������������������������������������������������������������������������196

MAPS Map 1.

Close the GAP Proposed Network ����������������������������� 5

Map 3. Existing Greenways and Sidewalks in the City of Asheville. ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 27 Multimodal Corridor Studies ����������������������������������������31

Map 5. Reported Pedestrian-Involved Crashes in the City of Asheville ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������34 Map 6. City Collected Pedestrian Counts �������������������������37 Map 7. Streets Mentioned in Close the GAP Surveys �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 49 Map 8.

Legacy Neighborhoods �����������������������������������������������������53

Map 9. Equity Score ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������59 Map 10.

Destination Score ��������������������������������������������������������������� 60

Map 11.

Destination and Equity ������������������������������������������������������61

Map 12.

Connectivity Score ���������������������������������������������������������������63

Map 13.

Safety Score �������������������������������������������������������������������������������65

Map 14.

Total Score by Tier Groups ������������������������������������������67

Map 15.

Combined Greenway Network Map ������������������� 89

Map 16.

Greenway Spines Map ���������������������������������������������������� 90

Map 17.

Arterial Greenways Map �������������������������������������������������92

Map 18.

Neighborhood Greenways Map ������������������������������94

Map 19. Neighborhood Greenways Pilot Project Map ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 98 Map 20.

Top Greenway Projects Map ���������������������������������� 104

Map 21. NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Projects ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������107 Map 22.

Public Input Score ������������������������������������������������������������157

Map 26. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 158 Map 27. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 5 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������162 Map 28.

Regional Connections ��������������������������������������������������203

TABLES

Map 2. Asheville is in the heart of Buncombe County, in Western North Carolina. ����������������������������������������������� 20

Map 4.

Map 25.

Public Input Score ������������������������������������������������������������ 141

Map 23. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 144 Map 24. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 148

Table 1. Total Crashes in North Carolina and Asheville, 2014-2019 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35 Table 2. The Share of the Asheville Population (Percentage) that Walks to Work ������������������������������������������������������35 Table 3. Number of People Walking (5:00-7:00 p.m.) and Percent Change in Various Areas of Asheville, 2014-2019 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������36 Table 4. Weekly Number of People Walking in Downtown and West Asheville, 2014-2015 ����������������������������38 Table 5. Typology Details - Greenway ����������������������������������������82 Table 6. Typology Details - Arterial Greenways �������������� 84 Table 7. Typology Details Neighborhood Greenways ��������������������������������������������������������������������� 86 Table 8. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Spine Greenways �������������������������������������������������������� 91 Table 9. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Arterial Greenways ���������������������������������������������������93 Table 10. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenways ���������������������������������95 Table 11. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Projects �������������������� 99 Table 12. Public Input Results and Comments (Arterial Neighborhood Greenways Below are Listed in Order of Public Rankings) �������������������������������������������� 101 Table 13. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������145 Table 14. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 ��������149 Table 15. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������159 Table 16. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 5 ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������163 Table 17. Seven Key Solutions to Improve Pedestrian Safety at Intersections (Source: STEP Guide). �����������������170 Table 18. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������192


Table 19. Goal 1: Equity ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 204 Table 20. Goal 2: Greenway Network ���������������������������������������205 Table 21. Goal 3: Pedestrian Network ������������������������������������207 Table 22. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network - ������������������������������209 Table 23. Goal 5: Project Development ����������������������������������212 Table 24. Goal 6: Policy ��������������������������������������������������������������������������214 Table 25. Goal 7: Funding ��������������������������������������������������������������������215 Table 26. Goal 8: Tools ��������������������������������������������������������������������������216 Table 27. Goal 9: Safety ������������������������������������������������������������������������218 Table 28. Goal 10: Multimodal Vision �������������������������������������220

QUICK SHEETS Quick Sheets #1: Things to Know Before You Read this Plan ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 14 Quick Sheets #2: Close the GAP Facility Types ��������������� 15 Quick Sheets #3: Pedestrian Crash Analysis ����������������������32 Quick Sheets #4: Things to Know About Prioritizing and Funding for Projects Before the Design ������������������������ 72 Quick Sheets #5: What is the Difference Between the ADA Transition Plan and Pedestrian Plan? ������������������������132 Quick Sheets #6: Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Facilities and Design Items ����������������������������������������������������������������142 Quick Sheets #7: Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Maintenance and Policy Items ���������������������������������������������������������143 Quick Sheets #8: Key Elements of NCDOT Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology ��������������������������������166 Quick Sheets #9: Recommended Project Implementation Process ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 180 Quick Sheets #10: Pre-Design Project Development Checklist �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������182 Quick Sheets #11: FAQ’s on Project Development & Next Steps ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������183


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


1

THE VISION


There’s a calmness, large trees, winding road with views ... the sidewalk is incomplete but I like walking in the roadway there -- it feels like country.”

-

2 /// GAP Plan /

- Oakley Resident


THE VISION This chapter provides an overview of Close the GAP and the Plan’s framework, which comprises the vision, goals, and objectives, and it lays the foundation for implementation recommendations found in later chapters.

I N TRO D UC T IO N Through many different planning efforts, Asheville citizens and its leadership have said they want better and more options to get from place to place. Our community’s vision indicates that providing options to travel by methods other than driving - such as walking, biking, or riding the bus - are important for the future of the City. These methods of travel are known as multimodal transportation options, or modes of transportation. When streets and greenways accommodate different modes of transportation, it is easier for all people to move about in our City. Multimodal transportation choices promote our City’s values of equity, sustainability, and building a more vibrant community for our residents. Several plans guide the City’s efforts to build a better multimodal network. Close the GAP will replace some plans and complement or make recommendations to other City plans.

C LO S E TH E G A P Close the GAP is a three component plan that replaces the City of Asheville’s existing Greenway (G), ADA Transition (A), and Pedestrian (P) Plans. The combined plans, or Close the GAP, is the City’s new vision to update and expand the network

of accessible sidewalks and greenways in our community. In addition, Close the GAP makes recommendations pertaining to the City’s policies and design standards for these transportation elements.

Vision Close the GAP’s vision provides the foundation for improving walking in Asheville: Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking. This vision sets the framework for Close the GAP’s goals and objectives. It also guides development of the policies, actions, and prioritization criteria, which are described in following chapters. In addition to the overall vision for walking in Asheville, each component of Close the GAP has a vision statement.

VISION Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking.”

/

GAP Plan

/// 3


GREENWAY PLAN VISION

TRANSITION PLAN VISION

PEDESTRIAN PLAN VISION

Asheville’s greenway network connects all areas of the City in order to allow people to move throughout the City on a continuous network, either on foot or by bike.

Asheville’s priority pedestrian corridors will allow people to move about without barriers on corridors that are ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible.

Asheville’s new sidewalk network will close gaps in the pedestrian network so that people in Asheville can walk from their home to key destinations along a network of streets which prioritize pedestrian mobility.

The Results Realizing Close the GAP’s vision is dependent on achieving Close the GAP’s 10 goals and 56 action items. The desired result is the complete pedestrian and greenway network depicted in Map 1.

MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION “...we have to make sure that we allow people to experience the City in all ways.” - Mayor Esther Manheimer, November 2018, Charlotte Street Road Diet Council Vote

4 /// GAP Plan /


Map 1. Close the GAP Proposed Network

/

GAP Plan

/// 5


2

1

Image 1 / Neighborhood Greenway Showing a Small Roundabout and Facilities that Prioritize Bicyclists and Pedestrians. (Source: Active Transportation Alliance)

3

Image 2 / Traditional Greenway in Asheville. (Source: Sealy Chipley) Image 3 / Eugene, OR Neighborhood Greenway Signage. (Source: City of Eugene, OR)

GR E E NWAY PL A N ( G ) A greenway is a multimodal transportation route that people can use for walking, biking, running, roller skating, using a wheelchair, and other activities. They are facilities for all ages and abilities and can be used for transportation and recreation. Currently, most of Asheville’s greenways are linear corridors of land that tend to follow features such as rivers or other natural features, or manmade features such as utility lines. The plan that guided the City’s greenway efforts before Close the GAP was the Greenway Master Plan Update (2013). Much has changed since 2013 when the vision for greenways was more recreational in nature. Since 2013, our greenways have become an important part of our multimodal transportation network, and Close the GAP was the City’s opportunity to rethink how it builds and connects the future greenway network. For example, Asheville’s early greenway strategy was to create greenways that are separated from the roadway. New plans, such as the

6 /// GAP Plan /

Greenways Connector projects, offer plans for on-road greenway segments. The Close the GAP plan defines a new set of greenway options, including a Greenway Spine, Arterial Greenways, and Neighborhood Greenways. These types of greenways will be used to create the right size greenway for different locations. The new plan also defines greenway corridors, which could be a combination of on-road and off-road facilities. The Greenway component of Close the GAP also provides an implementation plan that describes the ideal order in which the projects will be planned and built. Finally, included in this effort are design standards and specifications for greenways, on-street connectors, and exploration of a natural surface trails effort, known as Asheville Unpaved.


5

4

Image 4 / Navigating Our City with a Wheelchair is a Challenge. Image 5 / Example of a Missing Curb Ramp.

6

Image 6 / Curb Ramp and a Crosswalk.

A DA T R A NS I T IO N PL A N ( A ) Many people with disabilities in our City rely on our multimodal network as their primary, or only, way to get from place to place. According to the 2019 American Community Survey, 12.2% of Asheville’s population has some type of disability. Other sources report a greater disability presence. It is the City’s responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities can move about its transportation network without barriers.

sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking. The overall goal of the Transition Plan is to remove barriers in Asheville’s public rights-of-way so that pedestrians with disabilities can fully access all the amenities the City has to offer.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. The ADA Transition Plan (or Transition Plan for short) component of Close the GAP is the City’s ADA Self-Evaluation and will result in a new Transition Plan for the City’s Public Rights-of-Way. The Transition Plan will result in a plan to upgrade the City’s existing public rights-of-way network. Examples of public rights-of-way include public streets,

/

GAP Plan

/// 7


8

7

Image 7 / Worn Pathways, or Goat Trails, Indicate Where Sidewalks May be Needed. Image 8 / Constructing New Sidewalks is More than just a Sidewalk - Wood Avenue. Required a New Retaining Wall.

9

PED E S T R I A N PL A N ( P ) Everyone is a pedestrian, whether they intend to walk/roll, or use walking and rolling as a means to take other modes of travel. When you walk from your car or bike parking spot into the grocery store, you are a pedestrian. When you take transit, you are a pedestrian. The Pedestrian Plan aims to create a great walking network for all pedestrians. The Close the GAP Pedestrian Plan identifies the new sidewalks, crossings, and other facilities that make walking safe and comfortable for all of us. The Pedestrian Plan also provides policy and procedure recommendations to improve how the City and other partners build new sidewalk connections.

8 /// GAP Plan /

Image 9 / New Sidewalk Constructed through a New Development Project.


CO N N ECT I NG TO T H E V I SION Close the GAP’s vision, equity statement, goals, and actions will guide how the City implements the Plan. Additionally, the vision, the equity statement, goals, and actions reach beyond this Plan. Planning a great network for all walkers complements many of the goals found in other City plans, particularly the City’s comprehensive plan, Living Asheville. Building the Close the GAP network is guided by previous City plans and Close the GAP following elements: The vision provides the long-term direction for walking within the City of Asheville. It depicts the future vision Close the GAP will achieve when implemented.

The equity statement makes the case that building walk friendly communities is no longer a consideration - it is an imperative to building equitable communities.

The ten goals provide guidance on the condition the City is trying to achieve.

LIVING ASHEVILLE ENVISIONS THE CITY AS: “a great place to live because we care about people, we invest in our City, and we celebrate our natural and cultural heritage. Our City is for everyone. Our urban environment and locally-based economy support workers, entrepreneurs and business owners, families and tourists, and people of all ages. Cultural diversity and social and economic equity are evident in all that we do. Our neighborhoods are strong, participation in civic life is widespread, and collaborative partnerships are the foundation of our success. What makes us special is: • • • • • • • •

A diverse community A well-planned and livable community A clean and healthy environment Quality affordable housing Transportation and accessibility Thriving local economy Connected and engaged community Smart City

The 56 action items detail how the City can achieve each goal. The vision, goals, and action items comprise the Close the GAP Policy Framework, which is summarized in the Policy Framework at a Glance section below. Chapter 10 includes the full set of goals and recommended action items.

/

GAP Plan

/// 9


Equity Statement Building walk friendly communities is no longer a consideration - it is an imperative to building equitable communities. The benefits to better walking can be experienced by both the individual and the overall community. In a City like Asheville, where there are limited pedestrian facilities, these impacts are significant. Mobility for People Walking A person walking is the fundamental transportation system user and is the baseline for any system. By planning for people walking, we are planning for all users including the most vulnerable: young, aged and disabled. Walking provides quick and convenient access and is the most affordable transportation mode. Walking is a part of every trip; regardless of a person’s primary mode of transportation, whether that be bicycling, transit or a personal vehicle, each trip begins and ends as a pedestrian. Driving Isn’t an Option for Everyone Simply put, travel by vehicle isn’t an option for everyone. Many people are physically unable to drive a vehicle, cannot afford the onerous costs of car ownership, or choose not to drive for other reasons. Socio-economic factors such as age, disability,

Figure 1. Not All People Can (or Want to) Drive (Source: American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates (2014-2018)).

race and income all impact transportation choice. Providing transportation options and access for these individuals can mean freedom of movement, which translates to significant benefits to the individual and community. The Benefits Walking provides freedom of mobility and access, which is especially meaningful to youth, aged adults, people with disabilities and people with limited income. Mobility for people walking out of necessity is critical to access jobs, healthcare and resources. It is important to consider diverse mobility needs as we plan our transportation systems, giving everyone an opportunity to thrive. Safety People walking are known as vulnerable users of our streets given the inherent fact that they are not protected by a vehicle if involved in a collision, and also because they are disproportionately represented in crashes. This means that the number of people walking involved in crashes exceeds the number of people who choose to walk. The most recent data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals that in 2019 in the US, pedestrian deaths accounted for 17% of all traffic fatalities, which rose from 13% in 2010.1 Nationally, Black / African American and American Indian / Alaska Native people die while walking at higher rates when compared to white, non-Hispanic, Asian and Pacific-Islander people.2 Although these findings present significant challenges, there are proven engineering solutions at hand, which are explored in Close the GAP. When roads are designed to be safe and accommodating for people walking (and biking), they become safer for all transportation users.3 By designing for people walking, communities can build safe transportation systems that everyone deserves. Health, Economics & Sustainability Roads that are designed for people walking have positive health, economic, and sustainability outcomes for communities such as Asheville. Health benefits of walkable communities include not only the reduction of serious injury and fatality, but also positive outcomes such as reduction in chronic disease, heart disease and cancer. Walking improves the economy at many scales - the individual, business and community at-large. And finally, walking enables communities such as Asheville to achieve its goals towards sustainability and climate change.

10 /// GAP Plan /


Building walk friendly communities is no longer a consideration - it is an imperative to building equitable communities.

/

GAP Plan

/// 11


POLICY FRAMEWORK AT A GLANCE Vision Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking.

Goals GOAL 1: Equity Close the GAP network implementation results in a walkable and accessible community for all, no matter where you live or who you are. GOAL 2: Greenway City of Asheville residents and stakeholders travel along the greenway network on existing and new types of greenways. GOAL 3: ADA Transition Using Close the GAP’s ADA Transition Plan as a guide, the City of Asheville’s pedestrian network is ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible.

12 /// GAP Plan /


GOAL 4: Pedestrian Using Close the GAP as a guide, the pedestrians in the City of Asheville can walk from home (however one defines home) to key destinations along a network of streets comfortable for people who walk. GOAL 5: Project Development Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has increased capacity to deliver quality pedestrian projects. GOAL 6: Policy Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has updated and new policies to guide pedestrian and greenway network development. GOAL 7: Funding The City of Asheville has identified adequate, consistent, and wide-ranging funding sources to implement the Close the GAP Network.

GOAL 9: Safety As a result of implementing pedestrian safety best practices, pedestrian crashes in the City are significantly reduced. GOAL 10: Multimodal Close the GAP is integrated with other multimodal plans and programs to reach the City’s overall multimodal vision.

Recommended Actions The 56 recommended action items will help the City of Asheville meet the 10 goals and the Close the GAP vision.

GOAL 8: Tools Using a variety of existing and new technology and communication tools, the City of Asheville and its residents and stakeholders are informed about Close the GAP implementation progress and can interact with the City to request / share emerging needs.

/

GAP Plan

/// 13


Quick Sheets #1:

Things to Know Before You Read this Plan

The transportation field uses many words and acronyms that are not common in everyday conversation. Here we describe key concepts and infrastructure types. In the Appendix, a full glossary of definitions is available to readers.

Multimodal Transportation

Network

In Asheville, our multimodal options include the sidewalk network, greenways, on-street bicycle facilities, and our bus system, Asheville Rides Transit (ART). Additionally, Mountain Mobility provides a form of public transportation.

When we talk about a network, we mean a system of things that are connected and operate together. For example, Asheville’s multimodal network consists of greenways, sidewalks, onstreet bicycle facilities, and the bus system. A network functions well when people can conveniently get to the places they want or need to go using our bus, greenway, bicycle, and/or sidewalk systems.

Connectivity

Facilities

A community is connected (or has connectivity) when the transportation network links people to the places they want to go through safe, continuous and comfortable networks.

A facility is a general term referring to improvements and provisions made to accommodate bicycling or walking. A facility could be the surface on which one walks or bikes - such as a sidewalk - or the equipment that enables a person walking to activate a traffic light. The most common facility types in Close the GAP are indicated on the following page.

14 /// GAP Plan /


Quick Sheets #2:

Close the GAP Facility Types

Sidewalk

Pedestrian Signal Head

A designated space along the side of a street for use by people walking.

Mounted on the traffic light, these are intended to communicate to the person walking whether it is safe to walk.

Multi-Use Sidepath

Curb Ramps

A two-way shared use path located immediately adjacent and parallel to the roadway. Photo courtsey of pedbikeimages.org / Reuben Moore

Sloped surfaces that connect the sidewalk to the street. When designed according to ADA law, ramps allow people using a mobility device to mount and dismount sidewalk curbs.

Greenway

Pedestrian Crossing

An on- or off-street connector used for transportation or recreation.

Locations where a pedestrian may legally cross the street and where curb ramps must be provided. Crossings can occur at intersections or mid-block locations and may be accompanied by signs, paint markings (e.g. crosswalks) and traffic control (e.g. stop signs, traffic lights or flashing devices).

Paved Shoulder Paved, designated space on the edge of the roadway that is striped and on the same level as the street.

Pedestrian Push Button A device at a traffic light that can be used by a pedestrian to activate the walk/don’t walk pedestrian signal.

Neighborhood Greenway While not a designated facility in the sense that a traditional greenway is, a neighborhood greenway occurs on an existing neighborhood street to improve safety, help people cross busy streets, and keep traffic volume and speeds low. Photo courtsey of pedbikeimages.org / Russ Roca

Plan Plan/// / GAP / GAP /// 15


Chapter 1 Endnotes 1. National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2021, May). Pedestrians: 2019 data (Traffic Safety Facts. Report No. DOT HS 813 079). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 2. Smart Growth America. (2021). Dangerous by Design. https://smartgrowthamerica.org/dangerous-by-design/ 3. Jacobsen, P.L., Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Injury Prevention, 2003(9): p.205-209.

16 /// GAP Plan /


2

WHERE WE ARE TODAY


More, longer greenways and better connectivity!” - West Asheville Resident

18 /// GAP Plan /


2

WHERE WE A R E T O D AY In this chapter, we explore today’s conditions for walking and biking in Asheville. We begin by describing the City’s population and transportation trends and then offer an overview of the current sidewalks and greenways in the City. We close this chapter by describing some of the ways in which we measure what it is like to walk and bike in Asheville today, by investigating crashes and walking rates.

CO M M UN I T Y OV E R V I E W Asheville, incorporated in 1797, is the county seat of Buncombe County and located at the confluence of the French Broad and Swannanoa rivers. It is the largest city in Western North Carolina, and the 12th largest in the state of North Carolina (see Map 1). The city occupies 45.95 square miles and shares a border with several municipalities and the privately owned Biltmore Estate. Being in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Western North Carolina, Asheville’s geography is characterized by rolling hills, mountains, creeks, streams, rivers and small bodies of water. Asheville is a steadily growing community. The City is the fourth-fastest growing municipality in the region as indicated by the French Broad Metropolitan Planning Organization, with an 11% increase in population between 2010 and 2018.1 As a reference, the population in the state of North Carolina increased 9% between 2010 and 2018.2

In the Asheville region, leisure, hospitality, manufacturing and other services, and education and health services exceed the state averages in terms of employment. At the same time, the metro area has a lower portion of jobs in the following sectors, which are often higher wage positions: professional and business services, financial activities, government, and information.3

Demographics The following section is a summary of Asheville’s demographics as revealed in the 2019 U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS). The ACS is conducted annually (while the full Census is conducted every 10-years) and allows the U.S. Census Bureau to study information based on a sample of the US population. Except for the cost-burdened data, all findings are reported for the 2015-2019 5-year estimates or 2019 1-year estimates. During the development of this plan document, in November of 2021, the U.S. Census Bureau released the 2020 ACS findings; however, due to data collection challenges with COVID-19, the Census Bureau released this “experimental data with weights” and cautioned in using this data as a replacement for standard 2020 ACS 1-year estimates. As such, these findings are based on the 1- and 5-year estimates. Equity Framework Some in our community face greater disparities and vulnerabilities because of factors like who they are, who they represent, and their background. The following are factors that are often used as indicators of those with less equitable outcomes: race, gender, income, English proficiency, disabled population, children and seniors, single parents, education, and those who don’t own cars. In the following demographics overview of Asheville, these indicators are shown in bold.

/

GAP Plan

/// 19


Map 2. Asheville is in the heart of Buncombe County, in Western North Carolina.

20 /// GAP Plan /


Population The population of Asheville was 91,560. The median age was 39 years. An estimated 17.8% of the population was under 18 years and 18.1% was 65 years and older. Much of the Asheville metro has seen an increase in the population over the age of 65 and the City is no exception: since 2010, Asheville has seen an increase by 12.1% of aged adults over 65. About forty-eight percent (47.8%) of the population was male in gender. Figure 1 shows the split of Asheville’s population by gender and age; generally, women represented more of the aged population.

Figure 2. Asheville Population by Gender and Age (Source: U.S. Census).

85 and over 80 to 84 75 to 79 70 to 74 65 to 69 60 to 64 55 to 59 50 to 54 45 to 49 40 to 44 35 to 39 30 to 34 25 to 29 20 to 24 15 to 19 10 to 14 5 to 9 Under 5 10%

8%

6%

4%

2%

Males

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

Females

/

GAP Plan

/// 21


Figure 3. Types of Disabilities in the City of Asheville (Source: U.S. Census).

Hearing difficulty - 3.3% Vision difficulty - 2.3% Cognitive difficulty - 5.7% Ambulatory difficulty - 6.1% Self-care difficulty - 2.7% Independent living difficulty - 6.6%

0

1

2

3

Households There were 40,791 households, with the average household size being 2.16 people. Families made up 47.2% of households in the City. Seventeen percent (17.0%) of households included a child under 18 years of age, and 14.5% of households represented a person over the age of 65 living alone. Single male householders with children under the age of 18 made up 2.9% of the population while single female householders with children under 18 made up 8.9% of the population. Asheville households are relatively stable; 82.3% of people were living in the same residence as one year earlier. Eight percent (7.6%) of households in Asheville had no vehicle available to them; 43.8% of households had one vehicle available and 35.5% had two vehicles available. In Asheville, 48.2% of housing units are owner-occupied. Education Nearly half of Asheville’s population (49.9%) had a bachelor’s degree or higher. An estimated 7.4% did not complete high school. Disability Twelve percent (12.2%) of Asheville had a disability of some form, which are described in Figure 2.

22 /// GAP Plan /

4

5

6

7

Transportation to Work Two percent (2.1%) of workers in Asheville over the age of 16 had no vehicle available. An estimated 74.4% of city workers drove alone to work, and 7.3% carpooled, and 11.3% worked from home (telecommute). Nearly four percent (3.9%) of people walked to work, 1.1% used public transportation and 0.7% biked to work. Among those who did commute to work, it took them an average of 17.9 minutes to travel. Asheville’s commute time to work is relatively less than the County’s average of 20.5 minutes. Asheville’s telecommuting rate is worth noting; it is the sixth highest for any metropolitan area in the country and likely even higher with telecommuting changes with the COVID-19 pandemic.4 Income Asheville’s median household income was $49,930. 13.8% of people in Asheville were living below the poverty level. Compared to the County, the median household income in Buncombe County was $52,207 with 12.2% of people living in poverty.


Race & Ethnicity Eighty-four percent (84.0%) of Asheville identified as white and the remaining identified as BIPOC: Black or African American (11.2%), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.4%), Asian (1.7%), Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander Alone (0.3%) or some other race alone (0.5%). An estimated 6.8% of the people in Asheville were Hispanic. Language Of those residents over the age of 5, 90.6% spoke only English and 5.9% of residents spoke English “less than very well” at home. Housing Costs For owner-occupied houses in Asheville, the median property value was $270,400. The median monthly housing cost for owners with a mortgage was $1,457 and for renters was $1,043. Households that pay 30% or more of their income on housing costs are considered cost burdened. Cost burdened households in Asheville accounted for 31.2% of owners with a mortgage and 54.1% of renters). It should be noted that the “true” cost of housing factors in transportation costs to provide a more accurate assessment of housing choice and thereby housing cost. This is a concept known as Housing+Transportation Affordability Index,5 which was not calculated for this analysis but should be considered.

WHAT IS BIPOC? BIPOC stands for “Black, Indigenous, and people of color”, and is personfirst language that acknowledges people and humanity. This language is intended to shift away from words like “minority” or “disadvantaged.” Other person-first language used in this Plan is “people walking” and “people driving” which is intended to remind us that we are all people and humans are our highest priority.

Figure 4. Combining Housing and Vehicle Cost, We Begin to Understand the True Cost of Living in Asheville (Source: City of Asheville and NerdWallet).

AFFORDABLE HOUSING Vehicles are Expensive

AVL RENTERS Housing Wage Ave. Rent Shortfall

$831 $1,148 $317

$700 AVERAGE MONTHLY VEHICLE COST

/

GAP Plan

/// 23


46,421

21,017

15,845

70,529

2002 Asheville

21,830

17,925

2018 Asheville

Figure 5. Analysis of Where People are Starting Their Work Commute Trips (Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics).

Computer & Internet Access An estimated 11.2% of households in Asheville had no access to a computer; 77.6% had access to a desktop or laptop and 78.3% had access to a smartphone. Eighty-four percent (84.0%) of households had an internet subscription of some type. Putting It Together: Transportation Currently, Asheville sees low, but growing, walking and biking rates, as reported for transportation to work. Many households in the City are cost-burdened in terms of their mortgage or rent costs. The City’s poverty rate is higher, and the median household income is lower, than the county average. Asheville is seeing a growing aged adult population, and the disabled population is on-par with county- and state-wide averages. Asheville has a larger portion of their population over the age of 16 that is currently employed.

Jobs and Housing The Census makes data available related to employment, job flows, earnings, and commute patterns in a tool called OnTheMap. An analysis of 2018 data shows that, of the jobs in Asheville, 70,529 of people lived outside of the City and commuted in.

24 /// GAP Plan /

The remaining 21,830 jobs in Asheville were held by people who lived in Asheville.6 In Figure XX, these findings are compared to 2002 data: of the jobs in Asheville in 2002, 46,421 of people lived outside the City and commuted in; the remaining 21,017 were held by people who lived in Asheville.7 Over the last two decades, the number of non-city residents who commuted into the City has risen dramatically from 46,421 to 70,529 while the portion of City residents who stay for work has remained steady. This large daily influx of people to the City is a strain on its infrastructure and resources. These values are illustrated in Figure XX.

NET WORK OVERVI E W Asheville’s transportation network includes City roads, NCDOT-managed roads, and private roads. To understand how Close the GAP fits into the bigger picture of transportation planning in the City, County and region, it is helpful to understand how the transportation network operates and is functioning. This section of Close the GAP provides an overview of the network including the key components: transportation broadly, pedestrian, greenway, transit and bicycle.


2002

WALKABLE STREETS “Walkable streets encourage people to experience an area on foot and provide a comfortable, enjoyable and safe pedestrian experience, including those with disabilities.” -Living Asheville Comprehensive Plan (2018) Image 10 / Where the French Broad River West Greenway meets a sidewalk, bicycle facility, a bus stop and a street is a great example of a multimodal network.

/

GAP Plan

/// 25


Figure 6. The Lifecycle of a Pedestrian and Bicycle Project.

Transportation Network Asheville’s major transportation infrastructure includes Interstates 40, 240 and 26 as well as the Asheville Regional Airport. Major corridors that traverse the City include: Merrimon Avenue, New Leicester Highway, Patton Avenue, Haywood Road, Charlotte Street, McDowell Street, Hendersonville Road, Biltmore Avenue, Tunnel Road, Fairview Road and Broadway Street. Most of these roads are owned and maintained by the NCDOT. The mountainous terrain of Asheville has resulted in a limited street network that challenges interconnectivity; as a result, there is not an extensive grid system that commonly provides alternative streets or parallel roadways in a network. Asheville's multimodal network contains a system of sidewalks for pedestrians to walk, on-street places to ride a bicycle, and greenways (sometimes called multiuse or shared-use paths) to walk or bicycle. The City's bus system, Asheville Rides Transit (ART), is an important part of our multimodal network. While Close the GAP has not resulted in new bicycle or transit plans, it is attentive to how the pedestrian and greenway networks interact with the City's other modes of transportation. Throughout the City, we have a variety of planned network connections, many of which were identified through an earlier City-led planning process, such as the 2013 Greenway Master Plan Update or the Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan. The City is also a member of the French Broad River MPO (the MPO), our area's regional transportation planning

26 /// GAP Plan /

organization. Initial funding for some planned projects, which are developed in cooperation with the City and often with NCDOT, begins with the MPO. NCDOT also plans and develops multimodal projects. Close the GAP will help the City, the MPO, and NCDOT redefine and re-prioritize planned projects. The Close the GAP plans will serve as the document that guides projects from ideas through implementation. Figure 6 describes the part of the lifecycle of a pedestrian and bicycle project; the green circle represents the stage that the Close the GAP Plan exists within. The following sections provide an overview of Asheville's greenway, sidewalk, and other multimodal facilities.

Greenway Network Close the GAP will evaluate, revise, and re-prioritize planned greenway corridors. While Asheville doesn't quite have a connected greenway network, we're busy building the backbone of our future network. Today, we have 6.61 miles of existing greenways segments. All but the Hominy Creek Natural Surface Trail are paved. What We’ve Built Map 3 illustrates where current greenways exist in Asheville. The long-anticipated River Arts District Transportation Improvement Plan (RADTIP) was completed during the development of this Plan, in June 2021. Among many other elements, RADTIP includes the new 2.2-mile-long section of the Wilma Dykeman Greenway. Just across the river, the French Broad River West Bank greenway corridor was also


Map 3. Existing Greenways and Sidewalks in the City of Asheville. Source: City of Asheville Open Data

/

GAP Plan

/// 27


2013 Greenway Master Plan The original Greenway Master Plan was approved in 2009. Buncombe County implemented a master plan in 2012, identifying priority corridors that overlapped with some of the City’s corridors. The French Broad Greenway section from Hominy Creek Park to Amboy Road as well as Reed Creek Greenway were the earliest constructed greenways, followed by the Swannanoa Greenway (Riverbend section) near Walmart. In 2013, the City updated the Greenway Master Plan to reflect County plans, coordination with I-26 widening efforts, and refine the network. Since this Master Plan, the following progress has been made: the French Broad Greenway section along New Belgium Brewing was built (2017); Wilma Dykeman Greenway (part of the RADTIP project) was built, and the French Broad Greenway West is under construction (2022 completion).

Figure 7. How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built.

City-Led / Wood Avenue

under construction during the development of Close the GAP, with anticipated completion in Summer of 2022. Once completed, this section will be 1-mile long.

How Sidewalks and Crossings Get Built There are many ways in which new sidewalks and crossings get built. These programs build new sidewalks and crossings, improve existing sidewalks and crossings and fill in gaps where no sidewalks or crossings exist. In general, a sidewalk or crossing gets constructed through three main categories as illustrated in Figure 7: City-led, NCDOT-led and private development.

28 /// GAP Plan /

Private Development / Gerber Road

Through the GAP Plan, we evaluated the existing network (Map 3) containing 188 miles of sidewalk to determine network gaps; this will result in a plan to close gaps through new pedestrian facilities. The most extensive network of existing sidewalks and crosswalks in Asheville exists in the parts of the City that were first annexed in the late 1800s and through the turn of the century. Outside of this core sidewalk network, many of the City’s key corridors, such as Tunnel Road and Patton Avenue, have sidewalks. To further understand what sidewalks have been built, it is helpful to understand how sidewalks, crosswalks and crossing treatments are constructed in the City.

NCDOT-Led / Fariview Road

Pedestrian Network


City-Led Generally, City-led projects fall into three areas. In 2014, the City of Asheville began setting aside specific money for building new sidewalks in neighborhoods. This annual funding established the Neighborhood Sidewalk Program, which prioritizes the construction of new neighborhood sidewalks throughout the City. A recent example are the sidewalks along Wood Avenue between Future Drive and the Target shopping center. The City oversees these projects through the Transportation and Capital Projects Departments. In 2016, Asheville voters favorably supported a general obligation bond referendum that allowed the City to issue new debt for parks and recreation, affordable housing, and transportation projects. Included in the general obligation bond for transportation projects were 24 sidewalk construction and improvement projects. These capital projects were identified through community input with consideration to equity and fairness across the City. An example of recent bond-funded sidewalks include new sidewalks on Hill Street. The City also funds various maintenance programs through bond funding, such as street repaving and upgrades to traffic lights which also repair and replace sidewalks and curb ramps at intersections. The City oversees these projects through the Transportation Department, Capital Projects Department, and Public Works Department. The City actively seeks grant funding for sidewalks. Typically, only new sidewalk projects can be funded by grants, which usually comes from federal transportation funds, and are awarded through the French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization and administered through the NCDOT. The City received funding for most of the River Arts District Improvement Project (RADTIP) through a federal TIGER (now known as RAISE – Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity) grant. The City oversees these projects through the Transportation and Capital Projects Departments. A local match of at least 20% of the project cost is normally required for grants.

guides the statewide agency to partner with the local agency (in this case, Asheville) to make necessary accommodations for pedestrians through sidewalks and other facilities. A 2022 update to the policy offers additional methodology and guidance for Complete Streets Review. Depending on the type and origin of the project, NCDOT may pay for the entire project or share in the cost with the City. The NCDOT also makes various funding available that can support sidewalk construction and maintenance projects. For instance, the NCDOT installed new sidewalks on Fairview Road from Swannanoa River Road to Sona Pharmacy through its SPOT Safety funding program. Private Development or Redevelopment According to the City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), sidewalks are required for some levels of new construction and for renovations, additions or expansions to existing structures. This means that sidewalks should be installed when land is developed or redeveloped if required by City standards. Similarly, as parcels of land are redeveloped to a certain extent, sidewalks will also need to be constructed. For example, most of the sidewalk along Gerber Road was built by developers during new construction projects. The City oversees these projects through the Development Services Department. Sidewalk Maintenance In Asheville, it is the abutting property owner’s responsibility to keep sidewalks, grass strips, drainage and gutters clear and clean. This includes clearing dirt, grass, weeds, mud, trash and vegetation of any kind to prevent a hazard to the public. In the event of a winter weather event, this responsible property owner must remove snow, hail, sleet or other accumulations within 48 hours after the precipitation ceases to fall. As quoted from the City’s UDO, if ice accumulates from any source other than from a weather event, the property owner must remove the ice, “from the sidewalk on or before 10:00 a.m. each day in which the temperature exceeds 40 degrees Fahrenheit.”

NCDOT-Led Another way that sidewalks get built are with the City working in close coordination with NCDOT. Whether it is a roadway, bridge or sidewalk-specific project, NCDOT’s 2019 Complete Streets policy

/

GAP Plan

/// 29


Other Network Considerations Close the GAP's focus is the greenway and sidewalk networks the City will develop. However, other multimodal transportation projects are essential to building a complete greenway and sidewalk network in the City. Asheville Rides Transit ART (Asheville Rides Transit) provides bus service throughout the City of Asheville and to the Town of Black Mountain. There are a total of 18 routes that are named based on the approximate area of Asheville they serve (e.g., S1 serves south Asheville and N1 for north Asheville). All routes originate at the ART Transit Station at 49 Coxe Avenue in downtown. Everyone is a pedestrian at some point in their trip, and this is especially true for transit. Understanding transit in relation to a pedestrian and bicycle network is important as both modal opportunities offer enhancements to each other and are most effective when they operate as a unit. The phrase “first and last mile” is frequently used when understanding transportation systems and is a reference to the first and last leg of a transit trip – the parts of the trip that go from the origin to the bus stop, and the bus stop to the destination. For transit systems to be effective, the “first and last mile” of a person’s trip is often taken as a pedestrian. When both systems are in place, transit is safe, efficient and connected. Transit and pedestrian planning go together, and the City integrates transit into its pedestrian planning efforts. For example, in its Neighborhood Sidewalk Policy, proximity to a transit stop is a factor in project selection and prioritization. Similarly, proximity to transit was a critical area in understanding pedestrian gaps for this plan document. Bicycle Network In the same way that Asheville has streets, sidewalks and crossings that are good for people walking, the same is true for people biking. Asheville has on-street bicycle facilities, such as bike lanes and shared-use arrows, and has a plan to expand that network. These on-street bike facilities can have a great benefit to the pedestrian environment. While some choose to ride their bicycle on the sidewalk because it feels safer,8 evidence shows that it is not safer for people biking and it puts pedestrians at peril.9 Studies conducted by cities that have implemented high quality bike infrastructure, such as Washington DC10 and New York City,11 see a decline in sidewalk bicycle riding when dedicated, comfortable on-street bike facilities are constructed. When bicycle

30 /// GAP Plan /

facilities are well-designed, they discourage people from riding their bikes on the sidewalk, thereby improving conditions for pedestrians. As an added benefit, streets with bicycle facilities are proven to be safer for all users, including pedestrians.12 Bike facilities contribute to a higherquality pedestrian environment as they buffer the sidewalk from the traffic on the road and shorten the distance that pedestrians need to cross vehicle travel lanes at intersections and mid-block locations. As Asheville begins to plan for its multimodal connections, we are no longer thinking of greenways as off-road paths, only. Portions of our greenways may be on-street and may join or complement our City’s bicycle network. Similarly, neighborhood greenways (low traffic, neighborhood streets) serve both people walking and biking. Corridor Studies Some of our City’s busiest corridors are difficult for pedestrians to navigate. The City, the French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization (FBRMPO), and the County have worked together to study the multimodal transportation mobility and land use on the corridors illustrated in Map 4. While each corridor is unique, their current challenges share this common thread: the land surrounding the corridor has changed significantly, due to residential population growth and complementary commercial development. This puts pressure on the corridor which has not significantly changed in several decades. Each of these studies provide a deeper analysis of transportation needs, consider a range of solutions, and offer recommendations that are incorporated with Close the GAP.


Map 4. Multimodal Corridor Studies MERRIMON AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY This is a study and process to determine how multimodal goals can be achieved during NCDOT’s plans to repave Merrimon. The City of Asheville is advocating for a 4 to 3 lane road diet.

Source: City of Asheville, FBRMPO

I-26 CONNECTOR PROJECTS As a part of the I-26 Connector Project, the City of Asheville worked with NCDOT to identify multimodal facilities to connect West Asheville to Downtown. The projects will be implemented during I-26 construction.

BILTMORE MCDOWELL CORRIDOR STUDY The City of Asheville adopted this corridor study in November 2022. It contains a mixture of multimodal options to connect downtown to Biltmore Village.

TUNNEL ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY The Tunnel Road Corridor Study evaluated multimodal connections and safety improvements spanning from Beaucatcher Tunnel to Tunnel Road’s intersection with Swannanoa River Road. The plan was adopted in November 2022.

HENDERSONVILLE ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY The Hendersonville Road Corridor Study outlines multimodal and safety options from Rock Hill Road to Sweeten Creek Road. City Council adopted the plan in November 2022.

MERRIMON AVENUE CORRIDOR STUDY

I-26 CONNECTOR PROJECTS

BILTMORE MCDOWELL CORRIDOR STUDY

/

GAP Plan

/// 31


Quick Sheets #3:

Pedestrian Crash Analysis

Studying the 271 crashes involving pedestrians between 2014 – 2018, we can get a glimpse of trends and measures of pedestrian safety in the City.13 The findings described in this section are for reported crashes where a police officer arrives at the scene and issues a crash report. The team developed its crash analysis during the existing conditions portion of the project, at which time 2018 data was the most current. Map 5 illustrates the location of these crashes. A review of reported crashes is one way to measure safety, however, this does not provide the full story of safety on a corridor. For instance, in some cases, there may be few or no crashes on a corridor because there are no dedicated sidewalks or because it feels so unsafe. In this scenario, studying crash reports only provides a limited understanding of safety. In the following chapter, we explore pedestrian safety as it is perceived by people walking and biking, which adds another dimension to understanding comfort in the walking environment. And in Chapter 4, we will describe how this crash data is paired with other measures of pedestrian safety, such as vehicle speed, to develop a safety score and prioritize projects. Collectively, these findings help us have a broader understanding of pedestrian safety.

CRASH IMPACT This investigates the level of severity, or how bad, pedestrian crashes are across Asheville.

Crash Severity Statewide, 18% of on-road pedestrian crashes resulted in a fatality or severe injury. 8.5% of Asheville's crashes were fatal or severe. Of the 271 reported crashes from 2014 – 2018, 14 involved a fatality.

Ambulance-Called Statewide, ambulances were called to the scene for 77% of on-roadway pedestrian crashes. Ambulances were called for 64% of Asheville's pedestrian crashes.

Hit and Run Crashes Statewide, 22% of on-roadway crashes involved a hit and run of a pedestrian, which is lower than Asheville's 24%.

ROADWAY CONDITIONS This explores factors pertaining to roadway conditions at the crash location.

Speed In NC, the highest percentage (41%) of crashes are on 30-35 mph roadways. In Asheville, the higher percentage of crashes are also on 30-35 mph roadways (40%).

Number of Lanes In NC and Asheville, the highest percent of crashes occur on 2-lane roadways: 52% in NC, and 40% in Asheville.

32 /// GAP Plan /


Presence of Traffic Control A traffic-controlled location is when something like a traffic light (signal) or a stop sign is present. Double yellow lines, warning signs, and no control of any type are examples of no presence of traffic control. In NC, 70% of pedestrian crashes are at uncontrolled locations with no traffic devices; compared to 40% in Asheville.

Crash Location Statewide, 71% of pedestrian crashes occurred in intersections or were intersection related, compared to half (50%) of Asheville crashes.

It is important to note that Asheville has a high percentage of Unknown or Missing race data; 30% of pedestrian crashes in Asheville do not have known race data.

Gender Across NC and Asheville, men are more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash; 62% of crashes involved men in NC and 43% in Asheville. It is important to note that Asheville has a high percentage of Unknown/Missing gender (33% Unknown in Asheville, 3% across NC).

Pedestrian Position In NC, well over half (62%) of pedestrians were in the travel lane when the crash occurred. In Asheville, 50% of pedestrian crashes occurred in a travel lane.

CRASH TIMING The following shares some insight to when the crash occurred.

PEDESTRIAN INFORMATION The following detail describes the demographics of the person walking who was involved in the crash.

Age Group In NC, the adult group (age 19-59) comprises the majority, or 68% of pedestrian crashes. The same is true for Asheville (70%).

Race In NC, 52% of pedestrian crashes involve BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), 4% are unknown, and 44% involve pedestrians that are white. In Asheville, BIPOC crashes represent 20% of crashes, and white pedestrians are involved in 50% of crashes.

Crash Month In NC, the months with the highest number of crashes are October, November, and December, representing 31% of all crashes. In Asheville the top crash months are October, September, and July, representing 30% of all crashes in the City.

Crash Day In NC, Fridays have the highest percentage of all crashes (16%). In Asheville, Monday is the day with the highest percentage of crashes (20%).

Crash Year In NC, crashes increased by 13% between 2014 and 2018 while in Asheville they increased by 49%. Table 1 provides a snapshot of annual crashes in NC and Asheville.

/

GAP Plan

/// 33


Map 5. Reported Pedestrian-Involved Crashes in the City of Asheville Source: NCDOT, 2014-2018 Pedestrian Crashes

34 /// GAP Plan /

/ GAP Plan /// 34


CURREN T WA L K I NG R AT E S Strava Understanding bicycle and pedestrian patterns through the Strava platform was part of the Close the GAP analysis. However, due to the data use agreement between the City and Strava, the City cannot report specific findings from the data. Some of the general findings gleaned from the data include:

Table 2. The Share of the Asheville Population (Percentage) that Walks to Work (Source: U.S. Census)

• Total pedestrian commute trips have increased between 2019 and 2020, and the number of trips in 2021 has surpassed 2020

2010

• Total number of people recording walking trips while using Strava increased between 2019 and 2020, and the number of people recording trips in 2021 has surpassed 2020

2012

2.7%

2011

3.3% 3.7%

2013

4.1%

2014

• People between the ages of 20 and 54 are more likely to use Strava to record trips

4.2%

2015

U.S. Census

4.8%

2016

Transportation to work data is collected by the U.S. Census Bureau and is described in the demographics section of this chapter. Table XX describes the share of the Asheville population that chose to walk to work for the last decade. These are approximations provided through the American Community Survey, 5-year estimates for each year reported. The data shows an increase in the walking commute rate through 2015, with a decline in 2016 followed by a leveling out around 3.9% in the ensuing years to 2019.

4.5%

2017

3.8%

2018

3.8%

2019

3.9% Commute to Work - Share by Walking

Table 1. Total Crashes in North Carolina and Asheville, 2014-2019 (Source: NCDOT)

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2,119

2,158

2,246

2,237

2,405

2,240

1.8%

4.1%

-0.4%

7.5%

-6.9%

38

54

51

76

31

-26.9%

42.1%

-5.6%

49.0%

-59.2%

NC

Annual % Change AVL Annual % Change

52

/

GAP Plan

/// 35


Short-Duration Pedestrian Counts Annually, the City of Asheville’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force hosts a volunteer survey to count the number of people walking and biking through an intersection. The survey typically takes place from 5:00-7:00 p.m. on a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday of the second full week in September. The data reviewed here is for the 2019 collection year. Map 6 and Table 3 show the pedestrian counts at various locations in Asheville, comparing the average from 2014-2018 and the 2019 collection year. Downtown along College St sees the highest numbers of people walking, although the 2019 year reported a decline from previous year averages. Other areas with higher numbers of people walking include South slope area and Haywood Road in West Asheville, both of which saw an increase from years past. Counting along the Chestnut corridor has seen a decline in people walking as well as along W. T. Weaver Boulevard.

Table 3. Number of People Walking (5:00-7:00 p.m.) and Percent Change in Various Areas of Asheville, 2014-2019 (Source: City of Asheville)

Two-Hour Pedestrian Count Region 2014-2018

2019

Percent Change

Downtown (Woodfin & Roundabout)

146

157

7%

Downtown (College Street)

949

808

-17%

South Slope (Hilliard Avenue)

228

297

23%

West Asheville (Haywood Road)

202

352

43%

Chestnut St. Corridor

106

62

-71%

North Asheville (W. T. Weaver Boulevard)

84

64

-31

Glenn’s Creek Greenway

137

136

-1%

36 /// GAP Plan /


Map 6. City Collected Pedestrian Counts Source: City of Asheville Bike/Ped Task Force

DATA NOTE The City of Asheville’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force coordinates bicycle and pedestrian counts each September. While there is consistency in some locations, not all locations are counted every year. Additionally, the data is not adjusted to reflect weather and other variables. Therefore, the counts presented here represent the highest recorded count for the reporting period, 2016 - 2020.

/

GAP Plan

/// 37


Long-Duration Pedestrian Counts

Relevant Local, Regional and State Plans

The French Broad River MPO has count equipment that is capable of collecting week-long count data for people moving along sidewalks and greenways. Since 2014, the MPO has placed this equipment at various locations in Asheville. Of the MPO’s dataset, there are two locations with repeated data collection: downtown on Biltmore Ave (west side of the street, approximately 150-feet south of Patton Ave) and West Asheville on Haywood Road (north side of the street between Vermont and Herron Aves). Although this data collection was repeated within 6-months, and is therefore not ideal for annual comparisons, it does provide an understanding of overall volume and peak usage. Not surprisingly, in both locations the peak number of people walking was Saturday afternoon in December and Saturday evening in May). The equipment that collects this data does not differentiate by user type so in some cases the user may have been a person on a bike, on the sidewalk.

As a part of the Asheville Close the GAP Project, relevant planning documents have been reviewed and summarized. The purpose of this exercise is to ensure any recommendations that are developed from this plan are consistent with precedent, and to help establish vision and goals as Close the GAP advances. The plan review was limited to sections that related to pedestrian, ADA and greenway facilities within the City. In the Appendix, the full review of local, regional and state plans is provided. The plans pertaining directly to Asheville are shown in Figure 8 The City of Asheville and other partners have a wide variety of planning documents to guide pedestrian, ADA and greenway related decisions. Through the Close the GAP planning process, the City is presented with a prime opportunity to integrate the ideas and policies from previous studies into this project; the City also can bring forth new ideas and update concepts and policy documents.

The findings for these two locations are provided in Table 4 and the Appendix offers the data for all sites collected by the MPO).

Table 4. Weekly Number of People Walking in Downtown and West Asheville, 2014-2015 (Source: FBRMPO)

Biltmore Avenue ​

Haywood Road

Dec 2 - 9, 2014 (Tues-Tues)

May 29 - June 5, 2015 (Fri-Fri)

Dec 12 - 19, 2014 (Fri-Fri)

May 21 - 28, 2015 (Thus-Thus)

Total Users (Count)​

27,200​

35,474

8,881

9,407

Average Users/Hour​

162

211

53

56

Peak 2-Hour Count​

1,393 (2-4 p.m., Saturday Dec 6)

1,750 (8-10 p.m., Saturday May 30)

362 (1-3 p.m., Saturday Dec 13)

370 (8-10 p.m., Saturday May 23)

38 /// GAP Plan /


1992

2003

ADA Transition Plan

2009

2005

2008

Wilma Dykeman Riverway Master Plan

Pedestrian Plan

Comprehensive Bicycle Plan

2010

2013

2015

Parks, Recreation, Cultural Arts & Greenway Master Plan

Shiloh Community Plan 2025

Greenway Master Plan

Neighborhood Sidewalk Polciy

2016

2018

2018

2018

Asheville in Motion Mobility Plan

Burton Street Neighborhood Plan

Living Asheville & Neighborhood Plans on a Page

Transit Master Plan

2019

Swannanoa River Greenway Corridor & Feasibility Study

2021

Tunnel Road Corridor Study

2019

2020

Greenway Connector Project

Downtown Master Plan Update: Public Space Management

2021

2021

Biltmore Avenue & McDowell Street Corridor Study

Advancing Racial Equity in Asheville

2021

Hendersonville Road Corridor Study

Figure 8. Previous City of Asheville Planning Documents Reviewed for Close the GAP (Note: County and MPO Plans Were Also Reviewed and Findings Can Be Found in the Appendix).

/

GAP Plan

/// 39


Chapter 2 Endnotes 1 French Broad River MPO. (2020). Metropolitan Transportation Plan: 2045 Our Path to the Future. http://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/MTP_2045_Web.pdf 2 U.S. Census Bureau (2010 and 2018). American Community Survey 5-year estimates. [Data set]. https://data.census.gov 3 French Broad River MPO. (2020). Metropolitan Transportation Plan: 2045 Our Path to the Future. http://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/MTP_2045_Web.pdf 4 French Broad River MPO. (2020). Metropolitan Transportation Plan: 2045 Our Path to the Future. http://frenchbroadrivermpo.org/wp-content/ uploads/2020/07/MTP_2045_Web.pdf 5 Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2020, December 30). Welcome to the H+T Affordability Index. https://htaindex.cnt.org/ 6 U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics. Retrieved from [https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/]. 7 U.S. Census Bureau (2002). Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics. Retrieved from [https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/]. 8 Marshall, W. E., Piatkowski, D., & Johnson, A. (2017). Scofflaw bicycling: Illegal but rational. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1). https://doi. org/10.5198/jtlu.2017.871 9 Wachtel, A., & Lewiston, D. (1994). Risk Factors for Bicycle-Motor Vehicle Collisions at Intersections *. Ite Journal-institute of Transportation Engineers, 64, 30-35. 10 Jaffe, E. (2014, August 14). Tired of Cyclists Riding on the Sidewalk? Build More Bike Lanes. Bloomberg.com. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-08-14/tired-of-cyclists-riding-on-the-sidewalk-build-more-bike-lanes. 11 Sadik-Khan, Janette. (2011 October 11). [PowerPoint Slides]. New York City Department of Transportation. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/ pdf/2011_columbus_assessment.pdf. 12 Wesley E. Marshall, Nicholas N. Ferenchak. (2019). Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users. Journal of Transport & Health. DOI: 10.1016/j.jth.2019.03.004. 13 NCDOT Traffic Safety Unit. (2021). NCBikePedCrashes. [Data set]. North Carolina Department of Transportation. https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/ home/item.html?id=2a18016d2f1c469cb2edf5cc53e36f32.

40 /// GAP Plan /


3

THE COMMUNITY VOICE


Disabled voices should be highlighted, as disabled people have much greater awareness of what is currently lacking in our community.” - East Asheville Resident

42 /// GAP Plan /


3

THE COMMUNIT Y VOICE Community engagement made this document possible. Preferences and project ideas were identified by residents, community members, visitors and local interest groups. While COVID-19 limited the amount of face-to-face interaction, the team was able to work through limitations and shift the approach to achieve broad feedback and engagement. This chapter describes the timeline for all of the engagement activities and the purpose of each; full details on the meetings are provided in the Plan Appendix XX.

CO RE EN G AG E ME NT S TR ATEGY Coalescing the community vision for a three-part plan in a diverse urban environment necessitated guidance from a core group of individuals throughout this 2.5year project. This core engagement strategy took the form of several stakeholder groups described in this section. Specific individuals in each group are listed in the Appendix.

A NOT E AB OU T COVID-19 Like many people that encountered the COVID-19 Pandemic, the Close the GAP project team was challenged to rethink the engagement that is so integral to a project like this. With a seven-year-old Greenway Master Plan, no dedicated ADA Transition Plan for Public Rights of Way, and a fifteen-year-old Pedestrian Plan, Asheville was in need of guidance on projects and policies to realize its visions for a walkable community. And yet, on March 11, 2020, when COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic, Close the GAP had not yet launched broad community engagement and only hosted a few small, in-person, engagement events. The overall pandemic engagement strategy was to transition meetings and surveys to a virtual format, target overlooked or underrepresented voices, lean on community partners for help, launch a social media campaign and, where feasible, go to communities for in-person gatherings. The team was dedicated to ensuring that Close the GAP would represent the voice of Asheville despite the limitations posed by a pandemic.

/

GAP Plan

/// 43


PROJECT TIMELINE

Timeline to be completed with the final project before the final draft is complete.

KEY TTT / Think Tank Team CAC / Citizens Advisory Committee AVL / Asheville ADA / Americans with Disabilities Act

TTT Meeting #1

DEC 18

2020

KICK-OFF PHASE OCT ‘19 - FEB ‘20 TECHNICAL PROVIDER ENGAGEMENT

AVL UNPAVED ALLIANCE MEETINGS

Start of Community Survey & Marketing Campaign

OCT 30

GAP at Pumpkin Pedaller

OCT 31

Greenway Intercept Survey #1

AUG 10

Greenway Intercept Survey #2

AUG 14

Public Meeting #1 (Virtual) & Start of Project Network Survey

AUG 25

JAN 23

CAC Meeting #1

JAN 27

CAC Drop-In Meeting

AVL UNPAVED ALLIANCE MEETINGS

INFORMATION GATHERING Apr ‘20 - Aug ‘21

Public Meeting #1 (Virtual)

2021

MAR 23

CAC Meeting #2

SEP 14

ADA Focus Group Meeting #1

SEP 16

ADA Focus Group Meeting #2

JAN 20

Start Stakeholder Outreach (NCDOT, COA Committees / Commissions)

date

Draft Plan for Community Input

AUG 27

GAP IDENTIFICATION & NETWORK CONFIRMATION Aug ‘21 - Oct ‘21

2022

PLAN ADOPTION Mar ‘22 - May ‘22

44 /// GAP Plan /

Start of Final Community Survey

FEB 21

Start of Final Community Survey

FEB MAR 21 31


Think Tank Team (TTT) Close the GAP is one of Asheville’s largest multimodal planning efforts, spanning multiple City departments, Buncombe County staff, and other outside agencies, such as NCDOT. Given the impact that this plan will have on a broad range of City policies, projects and departments, the planning effort convened a team of technical advisors, known as the Think Tank Team, to steer the project. The individuals on the TTT were subject matter experts who assisted in guiding project development and policies, sharing perspectives, needs and expertise.

Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) The Close the GAP team developed the Citizens Advisory Committee to serve as an initial touchpoint in engagement activities. The individuals on the CAC represented an organization, neighborhood or interest group and brought forth their ideas in this smaller setting. CAC members acted as liaisons to the community voice, in idea generation and in promotion of GAP activities.

ADA Focus Group Close the GAP was also guided by a group of individuals with disabilities or representing those with disabilities. The ADA Focus Group provided input on

11

areas that needed better access, on prioritization for investment and review of accessibility recommendations.

Asheville Unpaved Alliance The Asheville Unpaved Alliance was built around the desire of many to implement a natural surface trail system within the City. While the City is supporting the effort, the hope is that it will grow to be a community initiative led by many organizations that have expertise in trail building, maintenance, volunteer recruitment, grant writing, and more. The group contains a broad spectrum of members from County and City parks and recreation staff, mountain bike and bicycle advocacy groups, trail running clubs, campus representatives (AB Tech and UNCA), and others. As part of this planning process, early facilitation helped the Alliance get off the ground. Since summer of 2021, the Alliance has been meeting on its own, led largely by the City, Asheville on Bikes, and Pisgah SORBA, to advance the goals and projects that were identified early on. The Asheville Unpaved Guidebook (found in Appendix XX) was developed as a document to support and formalize the group’s alliance agreements, identify projects, define trail standards, strategize potential policy and structure how the Alliance works with the City.

12

Image 11 / The First Meeting of the Think Tank Team in December 2019. Image 12 / The First Meeting of the Community Advisory Committee in January 2020.

/

GAP Plan

/// 45


“Asheville is an extremely difficult city to navigate using a wheelchair (especially manual), not only due to the steep and hilly terrain but also due to the deteriorating and pre-ADA pedestrian infrastructure and lack of inclusive accessibility in many places.” - Asheville Resident

46 /// GAP Plan /


TARGETED WO R K S E S S IO NS The Close the GAP team hosted work sessions with several City departments and external agencies to discuss the following topics as it relates to walking needs and the ADA: resources and planning, recommendations, policy and implementation. The goal of these sessions was to close the gap between existing and needed resources and methods, to gather feedback on recommendations, and to map the course for implementation. The following agencies were interviewed throughout the planning effort; unless otherwise indicated, the agency represents City of Asheville departments: • Transportation Department • Public Works Department • Legal and City Manager’s Office • Planning and Urban Design Department • Development Services Department • Capital Projects Department • NCDOT • Buncombe County • Blue Ridge Southern Railroad • US Access Board

CIT Y TA S K FO RC E & CO M M IS S IO N PRES EN TAT IO NS The GAP team presented project updates for feedback from the Multimodal Transportation Commission and the Greenway Committee. These presentations took place during the information gathering and network confirmation phases.

CO M M U N I T Y S U R V E Y S

questions and the other was targeted to those with a disability or someone representing a person with a disability. General GAP Survey See Figure 8 for an overview of results. • There were nearly 1,570 responses to the GAP general survey with 4,259 written comments. The demographics of the respondents generally reflects that of the City. • We asked survey-takers to share what they would do if they were in charge of the City’s greenway and pedestrian programs. Top ranked responses included connecting major greenways, adding more sidewalks, and more neighborhood connections. • Respondents didn’t have a strong preference for the type of facility they would like to see - what they really wanted were more and better connections. • Survey-takers wanted to feel safer at intersections than they currently did. • Respondents liked direct and complete connections and did not like gaps where there was no sidewalk or greenway. • Survey-takers expressed a willingness for a small property tax increase to fund pedestrian and greenway projects; generally, around 1.5 pennies was acceptable. Map 7 illustrates a map of Asheville indicating areas of the City’s and streets that had a greater number of mentions in comments. Generally, arterial streets were mentioned more frequently for their pedestrian needs. The top 10 streets that received some type of comment include, either in a positive or negative context, include: 1. Merrimon Avenue 2. Kimberly Avenue 3. Broadway Avenue 4. Lexington Avenue 5. Tunnel Road

Three survey types were developed for the Close the GAP project. These vary from online to in-person and are described here.

6. Biltmore Avenue

Broad Community Feedback Survey

9. Beaverdam Road

During the information gathering phase of Close the GAP, two surveys were released concurrently, asking people about current and desired states of walking and rolling in Asheville. One survey asked general

10. Cumberland Avenue

7. Haywood Road 8. Lyman Avenue

/

GAP Plan

/// 47


Figure 9. General Gap Survey Results Budget Prioritization

Who Took the Survey?

If you were in charge of Asheville’s pedestrian and greenway programs and budget, which of the following efforts would you prioritize to make walking and greenway use more convenient, safe and well connected.

1,570 Participants / 93,000 (1.7% of population)

Connect the major greenways that can get

75% us across the City (greenway network)

4,259 Comments

67% Add missing sidewalks

89% White / 83% White in City

Add more neighborhood greenway

59% connections 54% Female / 52.2% Female in City

42% Connect sidewalks & greenways to transit 87% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish / 77.9% in City

Address speeding traffic

41% (e.g. traffic calming)

Preference for Separated Facilites How likely are you to use the following greenway or greenway connector types for recreation and transportation needs?

Traditional Asphalt or Concrete Greenway

Not Very Likely

Very Likely

Not Very Likely

Very Likely

Traditional Greenway with Natural Surface Shoulder Sidewaks with Bike Lane Sidewalks with Buffered Bike Lane Sidewalks with Bicycle Boulevard Shared Streets Designated Roadway Shoulders Combo Sidewalks with Cycletrack Multiuse Sidepath

Pedestrian Intersection Experiences Select the top factors that make a street crossing difficult at locations with and without traffic lights

83%

People in cars (turning) who don’t stop/yield at unsignalized locations

81%

Locations unsafe because people driving travel too fast, too few breaks in traffic

77%

People in cars (turning) who don’t stop/yield at signalized locations

48 /// GAP Plan /

Preference for Separated Facilities How willing would you be to pay a small increase in property tax to fund projects? How much of an increase would you support?

Not Willing

Very Willing

No Pennies

Two Pennies

Walking Experiences A direct & complete sidewalk route defines their favorite walking street.

68%

79%

A missing sidewalk or significant gaps defines difficult routes.


Map 7. Streets Mentioned in Close the GAP Surveys Source: Close the GAP Survey Results

/

GAP Plan

/// 49


ADA Survey Here is an overview of the survey results: • There were 251 responses to the ADA survey, 451 written comments. The demographics of those who responded generally align with those characteristics of Asheville residents.

People with disabilities most valued the following infrastructure in their transportation network: onstreet parking, sidewalks, access to bus stops, street crossings and curb ramps. Priority areas for improvement included parks, libraries and community centers; grocery stores and shopping centers; and transit lines/stops.

• Respondents had a variety of disabilities, largely those that impact their ability to move about the street system. • A large portion of respondents reported using a car when they would have preferred to walk or roll but couldn’t do so because of barriers in the network.

Figure 10. ADA Survey Results Who Took the Survey?

Barriers Are there times when you would like to walk or use a mobility device to reach a destination, but you do not because of barriers?

251 Participants / 10,955 (2.3% of disabled population) Yes and I have a car and can drive to places I cannot walk

451 Comments

5%

80% White / 83% White in City

Yes and I have a reliable transportation option

5%

17.8% 49.5%

No 55% Female / 52.2% Female in City Yes and I use Mountain Mobility 92% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish / 77.9% in City

22.8%

Yes and I use ART

Type of Disability Walking Moving Vision Breathing Cognitive Abilities Other Least Prevalent

50 /// GAP Plan /

Most Prevalent


Intercept Surveys

“Most streets in Asheville only have sidewalks on one side making it necessary for folks in wheelchairs.... to have to cross where there are often no crosswalks.” - Asheville Resident

To meet people where they are walking and wheeling, the Close the GAP team interviewed people as they were using the Reed Creek and Wilma Dykeman Greenways. These surveys, known as ‘intercept’ surveys since they are intended to intercept a user in the midst of their activity, were conducted on August 10 and 14, 2021. The intercept survey asked people about their particular trip and information about what they would be spending in order to arrive at an understanding of the economic impact of greenways. While the full summary of findings is available in Appendix XX, some highlights of the intercept survey include: • 540 surveys; 60% from the River Arts District/ Wilma Dykeman Greenway and 40% from the Reed Creek Greenway • 43% of users walked or bicycled to the greenway; 57% drove to their starting location • The primary activity of trail users was walking (54%), followed by running (26%), and bicycling (18%), and 2% other • The median time spent on the trail was 65 minutes

13

14

Image 13 / Chalk Art Advertising the Greenway Intercept Survey in the River Arts District. Image 14 / Linda Glitz with Connect Buncombe Interviewing a Woman in the River Arts District.

/

GAP Plan

/// 51


Project Network Survey An online survey was hosted from August 25 - October 31, 2021 to collect community input on a draft network of recommendations for walking and greenway needs. A series of maps proposed a citywide network of sidewalk repairs, ADA upgrades, completion of missing sidewalk sections and greenway links. The survey asked users to share what streets they felt were overlooked, to rank key greenway segments, and to share any remaining feedback. This survey was promoted through the City’s Communications and Public Engagement Department through the neighborhood newsletter, Nextdoor, and social media. Staff and the project team presented the survey to the following committees of the City: Neighborhood Advisory Committee, Multimodal Transportation committee and the Legacy Neighbors Meeting. Additionally, City staff led targeted outreach to the following neighborhoods at this intermediate stage of the project: Shiloh, Burton St, Southside, East End and Emma. Posters were put on display at the following Community Centers: Linwood Crump Shiloh Community Center, Stephens-Lee Recreation Center, Burton Street Community Center, Arthur R. Edington Education & Career Center, Dr. Wesley Grant Sr. Southside Community Center, West Asheville Public Library, Oakley/South Asheville Library, East Asheville Public Library, and North Asheville Public Library. A total of 1,164 responses were made to the project network survey site in the time that the survey was open for feedback. Figure 11 describes a demographic summary of the respondents to the survey. There were 170 responses to the pedestrian network map, which resulted in 25 changes or additions to the map. A total of 412 rankings were provided for the greenway network map, which helped prioritize projects. The Figure 11. Project Network Survey Demographics Summary.

Who Took the Survey? 1,164 Responses

89% White / 83% White in City

59% Female / 52.2% Female in City

79% Not Hispanic, Latino/a/x or Spanish / 77.9% in City

52 /// GAP Plan /

LEGACY NEIGHBORHOODS The Legacy Neighborhoods Coalition’s membership is comprised of neighborhoods that have historically faced racially discriminatory practices, including Urban Renewal and Redlining. These neighborhoods also face current displacement due to nationally ranked levels of gentrification and an absence of local government employing community-led antidisplacement strategies in policies and practice. Asheville Buncombe Community Land Trust, Burton Street Community Association, East End/ Valley Street Neighborhood Association, PODER Emma Community Ownership, Shiloh Community Association, and Southside Rising are working together to ensure community-led development in their neighborhoods, prevent harmful development, and find solutions that support legacy residents to remain in their neighborhoods. (Source: Buncombe County)

complete summary of findings on this survey are in Appendix XX.

Final Community Opinion Survey On February 21, 2022, the final set of project recommendations was shared with the community to collect feedback. This survey closed on March 21, 2022 and in that time, 4,216responses and 471 comments were collected..


MAP NOTE A formal boundary describing the Emma Community has yet to be developed. For planning purposes, Buncombe County and the City of Asheville should work with Emma community leaders to identify a community driven and supported neighborhood boundary.

Map 8. Legacy Neighborhoods Source: City of Asheville & Buncombe County

/

GAP Plan

/// 53


Figure 12. Additional Engagement Strategies Including StoryMaps, Online Surveys, and Social Media Promotional Materials.

PU B L IC M E E T I NG S The Close the GAP team hosted two virtual public meetings. The purpose of the first set of meetings was to describe the priority pedestrian and greenway network and gather feedback; these were hosted on August 25, 2021 (6-7:30 p.m.) and August 27, 2021 (10-11:30 a.m.). Following this series of meetings, City staff hosted a roadshow where they visited neighborhood organizations and further facilitated feedback. Included in this first Public Meeting was an explanation of the Project Network Survey.

PH OTO & V I D EO C A MPA IG N Thanks to a grant from Connect Buncombe, City staff was able to hire a photographer and videographer to tell the story of Close the GAP. The photos and videos, representing diverse faces and voices of Asheville, share the many ways that it is both easy and challenging to move around the City. These tools were used to engage people across Asheville in Close the

54 /// GAP Plan /

GAP. The photos were used to develop social media imagery (Facebook and Instagram), posters, website imagery and targeted advertising (Urban News).

ADDI T IONAL ENG AG EMEN T ST R AT EG I ES To reach further into the community, the TPD team developed several resources that are illustrated in Figure 12. These video and digital media include StoryMaps for Close the GAP and Asheville Unpaved and a Community Overview on YouTube in English and Spanish. These tools were promoted online but also used when in-person events were allowed. In these in-person meetings, the tools were provided as a presentation and follow up item. Additionally, the team expanded outreach through community e-newsletter posts and targeted outreach to specific organizations in the City.


4

HOW WE GOT HERE


I don't really love walking streets here because sidewalks are narrow, if we have them at all.” - West Asheville Resident


4

H OW W E G OT HERE

Destination + Equity

+

In this chapter, we review the steps the team took to arrive at project recommendations. This process began with a technical analysis that included several community engagement touchpoints before arriving at the final recommendations as described in Chapters 5, 6 and 7 for the Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian Plans, respectively.

Figure 13. The Following Three Factors Guided the Creation of Projects for Close the Gap.

TH E B IRT H O F A P RO J EC T

As such, it is important to rank projects so that the City can focus limited resources on key projects in order to achieve the goals and vision set out at the beginning of this plan. To rank projects, Close the GAP focuses on three key factors as illustrated in Figure 12: destination + equity, connectivity and safety. These three factors were used to rank projects based on the corridor approach, as described in the following.

Safety

+

Much of the community’s feedback gathered during this project took the form of a project idea or recommendation, such as a desire for a sidewalk connection on a particular street. In a plan like Close the GAP, which covers pedestrian, ADA and greenway needs, at the scale of a City like Asheville - the result is a long list of possible project ideas. Although all projects identified in this plan are important, the City simply does not have the resources to complete the entire vision in the near term.

Connectivity

/

GAP Plan

/// 57


CORRIDO R A P P ROAC H The “corridor approach” is an effort to upgrade all pedestrian facilities in the public right of way by developing projects to address sections of public corridors, such as greenways or streets with sidewalks, in an organized fashion. Project development for all three plans was based on the prioritization methodology described in this chapter. Chapters 5, 6 and 7 explain how these corridor scores were utilized to develop project lists for Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects. For more information on how this process fits together, see the flowchart on page 70 at the end of this chapter. A corridor, which can be a sidewalk or greenway section, is defined by the roadway or greenway beginning and end points as shown in the project lists and maps. Not all existing roadway corridors (or segments) in the City are on the priority list; however all existing pedestrian facilities are in the ADA Transition plan. Additional details on the ADA Transition Plan are included in Chapter 6 and Appendix XX.

Destination + Equity Score The goal of the destination + equity score was to identify the essential places that people need to access and the areas of the City with the greatest equity need. To understand the combined destination + equity score, we first had to score them individually. For the equity component, we wanted to know: Does the corridor provide greater access to a high equity need area? To arrive at that answer, we used data from the U.S. Census (2019 American Community Survey) to score areas of the City known as Block Groups. This is a geographic area designated by the U.S. Census that typically represents between 600 and 3,000 people. Each Block Group received an equity score based on the following values: • Median household income, because people with lower incomes have fewer means to pay for the high costs of transportation such as car ownership (and are therefore more likely to walk or use public transportation). • Percent of the population that is BIPOC, because people of color in our city have been

58 /// GAP Plan /

disproportionately affected by housing and transportation policy. • Percent of the population that is considered living below the poverty, because those affected by poverty are more likely to walk and use public transportation as a primary form of transportation. • Percent of households with no vehicles available to them, because people without vehicles are more likely to rely on walking and public transit for transportation. • Percent of the population above the age of 65, because, as people age, they may be more likely to stop driving a car. • Percent of the population living with a disability, because many people with a disability cannot, or choose not to, drive. • Percent of the population with limited English proficiency, because using transportation systems, particularly driving, is challenging to those with limited English proficiency. These factors are commonly called equity indicators as they can be used to evaluate levels of inequity in the community and measure progress towards a more equitable future. The equity score for each Asheville Census Block Group is illustrated in Map 9. To determine the destination factor value, we wanted to know: Does the corridor provide access to essential services and resources? To arrive at that answer, we identified key destinations (such as grocery stores, schools, homeless shelters, parks - see the Appendix for all destinations considered), developed a score, and assigned that to each corridor in the City. We mapped this information for City-owned and NCDOT-owned roads, but not interstates (as interstates are not accessible to pedestrians). This analysis helped us to understand the places people need to reach and the corridors are illustrated in Map 10. The team then combined the destination and equity scores, as illustrated in Map 11, to identify hot spots for pedestrian needs and guide prioritization efforts.


Map 9. Equity Score Source: U.S. Census, American Community Survey, 2019 5-Year Estimates

/

GAP Plan

/// 59


Map 10. Destination Score Sources: City of Asheville, NCDOT, Google Maps, Buncombe County, Various Sources to Identify Service Locations, Close the GAP Team Analysis

60 /// GAP Plan /


Map 11. Destination and Equity Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

/

GAP Plan

/// 61


Figure 14. The Five Categories of Pedestrian Connectivity: Primary Spine, Secondary Spine, Major Collector, Minor Collector and Local/Neighborhood Connections.

15

Connectivity Score The goal of the connectivity score was to identify key street links across the City that make walking a viable transportation option. Close the GAP grouped the City’s pedestrian transportation network into five primary categories as illustrated in Figure 11. The streets that received the highest scoring are the pedestrian spines, which immediately connect more people to more destinations. For example, a road like Hendersonville Road in Biltmore Village has a connectivity score of five (5) as it connects more people to destinations. On the other hand, a road like Joyner Avenue has a connectivity score of three (3) as it is a pedestrian collector that connects State Street to Riverview Drive and parallels Amboy Road, which is a primary spine corridor..

Image 15 / Based on Connectivity Scoring, Hendersonville Road Has a Higher Connectivity Score (5) than Joyner Street (3).

62 /// GAP Plan /


Map 12. Connectivity Score Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

/

GAP Plan

/// 63


Safety Score

16

The goal of the safety score was to identify areas in the City where the pedestrian experience is challenged due to safety factors. The safety score was a combination of reported crashes and the following factors that relate to safety: traffic speed, traffic volume and number of traffic lanes. Map 13 illustrates the full safety score results. A corridor would receive an initial score based on the posted speed limit, the amount of traffic on the road (AADT), and the number of traffic lanes. Next, the corridor received extra points based on its pedestrian crash history. The corridor received two additional points if the corridor crash history included a pedestrian crash fatality, or one extra point if there were other recorded pedestrian crashes. The pedestrian crash data was discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2 and is shown in Map 5. For example, a road like Murdock Avenue in North Asheville had the lowest safety score of one (1), as it is a low speed, low volume, and is a two-lane road with no recorded crashes. On the other hand, Patton Avenue in West Asheville received the maximum safety score of seven (7) as it is high speed, with high traffic volume, more than four (4) travel lanes and multiple recorded pedestrian crashes.

Image 16 / Based on Criteria and Rating Methodology, Murdock Ave in North Asheville Had the Lowest Safety Score (1) While Patton Ave Had the Highest Possible Safety Score (7).

64 /// GAP Plan /


Map 13. Safety Score Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

/

GAP Plan

/// 65


Results Each road segment received an individual destination + equity, safety and connectivity score. The roadway segments were organized into five scoring groups, or tiers, as shown in Map 14 and described in Figure 15. Tiers The tiers used to group projects are illustrated in Figure 14. Tier 1 represents the highest combination of the connectivity, safety and destination + equity score, while tier 5 is the lowest combined score. An example of a tier 1 corridor is Merrimon Avenue. Merrimon provides direct connection for people walking, it links to essential destinations, and it has a documented history of reported crashes. Edgemont Road is a tier 5 project example since it primarily serves local neighborhood, does not link key destinations and the relative safety concerns are lower.

Future Use of Corridor Scores and Tiers This scoring process was utilized primarily to develop priority corridors groups (tiers) that were advanced into project development for each plan (Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian). However, the scoring results and tiers will be available as a GIS tool for City staff and can be utilized as follows: • Evaluation of corridors that may need to be added to the list in the future. • The scoring categories and final tiers are referenced in Chapter 9 and are recommended to be referenced when updating the Asheville Standards Specification and Details Manual (ASSDM). For example, for roadways with higher safety scores, it is more important to provide sidewalks on both sides of the road with greater separation from traffic.

All projects take time, and some are very complicated while others are dependent on funding partners like NCDOT. These variables shift project timelines, and as such, it is possible that lower scoring projects will be constructed while we’re still assembling the pieces of a higher scoring corridor. The tiers do not necessarily imply order of implementation or importance, but were used to group the projects into similar categories (or road types), and to aid in overall project development and prioritization as is described further in Chapters 5, 6 and 7.

Figure 15. The Tiers of Projects as Defined by Combined Scores.

Combined Score: Connectivity, Safety, Destination & Equity Tier 1: 13-17 Points

Tier 3: 8-9 Points

Tier 2: 10-12 Points

Tier 4: 7 Points

66 /// GAP Plan /

Tier 5: 0-6 Points


Map 14. Total Score by Tier Groups Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

/

GAP Plan

/// 67


17

18

Image 17 / Recommendations for Brevard Road in West Asheville Include ADA Upgrades to the Existing Sidewalk and a New Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street. Image 18 / Hendersonville Road Corridor Study Rendering Showing a Planned Multi-use Sidepath With the Existing Sidewalk on the Other Side of the Street.

PRO JECT C AT EG O R I E S P L AN IDE N TIF IC AT IO N Once each corridor was scored and reviewed, corridors were further divided into categories as the following strategy describes:

Assign to a Primary Plan Each roadway segment was assigned to the Greenway Plan (Chapter 5), ADA Transition Plan (Chapter 6) or Pedestrian Plan (Chapter 7). Additional project development discussion and final project lists can be found in these chapters as follows: • Chapter 5 - Greenways Plan: Includes identified greenways, multi-use pathways, and neighborhood greenway corridors. Note that some greenways overlap with roadway corridors. For example, the City and Buncombe County recently sponsored three corridor studies that resulted in multi-use path recommendations which were placed on the greenway project list. For example, the multi-use paths proposed for Hendersonville Road, Tunnel Road, Biltmore Avenue and McDowell Street can be found on the greenway project list. • Chapter 6 - ADA Plan: Roadway corridors with existing sidewalks in need of replacement, repair or maintenance were placed on the ADA Transition Plan. • Chapter 7 - Pedestrian Plan: Roadway corridors with missing sidewalk sections, sidewalk widening

68 /// GAP Plan /

needs and/or crossing enhancement needs were placed in the Pedestrian Plan (the pedestrian plan project list). Some corridors were placed on multiple lists. A few examples of this are projects that: • Have both existing sidewalk sections, which were placed on the ADA Transition Plan, and sidewalk gaps, which were placed on the Pedestrian Plan. An example of this is Brevard Road in West Asheville. As shown in Image 17, there is an existing sidewalk in need of ADA upgrades as well as sidewalk gaps. • Have sidewalk gaps on one side, which would result in a project for the Pedestrian Plan, and a planned multiuse sidepath on the other side of the road, which would result in a project on the Greenway Plan. An example of this is Hendersonville Road in South Asheville. As shown in Image 18, this rendering from the Hendersonville Road Corridor Study shows the planned multiuse sidepath on one side with an existing sidewalk on the other side.

H OW I T AL L COMES TOG ET HER Network Confirmation Once projects were assigned to a plan (Greenway, ADA, or Pedestrian) the next step was a public feedback point to confirm that critical connections


were all identified prior to moving to specific project recommendations. In order to confirm the priority pedestrian corridors (roadway segments) and get input on greenway connections, a second round of online public engagement was initiated in August of 2021. These results are integrated into the following Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian Plans.

Project Development & Recommendations After the network was confirmed through public feedback, detailed project specifics were developed and are discussed in each chapter. These details include: • Existing conditions review and connection needs • Recommendations • Current funding status (if applicable) • Next steps for implementation • Partnerships required, if applicable, e.g., NCDOT, Buncombe County etc. In addition, an overview of Recommendations for Project Development (Chapter 9) and Policy Review and Recommendations (Chapter 10) apply to all three plans. The flow chart on page xxx shows how this process all comes together.

/

GAP Plan

/// 69


Destination and Equity Scores (Areas in Greatest Need for Connectivity)

Chapter 4

Greenway System Gap & Off Road Connection is Feasible

Sidewalk Network Priorities (Includes Safety & Connectivity Scores)

(Chapter 6)

(Chapter 6)

Existing Pedestrian Facility Needs ADA Upgrades

New Sidewalk & Crossings Needed

Greenway Plan

ADA Transition Plan for Public Right-of-Way

Pedestrian Plan

(Chapter 6)

(Chapter 7)

(Chapter 8)

Confirmation and Public Feedback August & September 2021

Recommendations & Project Lists* (Chapter 6, 7 & 8)

Project Development & Next Steps (Chapter 9)

Design Standards & Policy Recommendations (Chapter 10)

Take Action (Chapter 11)

*Before reviewing the recommendations in the following Chapters, it is helpful to understand some terminology, and understand how NCDOT and the City develop and maintain facilities. Since these items are referenced repeatedly throughout the following chapters, please find some basics on the following pages.

70 /// GAP Plan /


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing

/

GAP Plan

/// 71


Quick Sheets #4:

Things to Know About Prioritizing and Funding for Projects Before the Design What you need to know about roadway maintenance and funding requirements All publicly owned roads, with a few exceptions, are maintained by either NCDOT or the City of Asheville. NCDOT has maintenance responsibility for Interstates (I-240), US Highways (US 25 / Hendersonville Road), NC Highways (NC 81 / Swannanoa River Road), and Secondary Roads (SR-3556 / Amboy Road). High scoring corridors maintained by NCDOT were placed on the NCDOT Priority Corridor Lists for the ADA and Pedestrian recommendations. This will aid the City and NCDOT in their project development prioritization and to develop projects that meet their requirements and priorities. These corridors also have funding partnership opportunities that differ from City of Asheville streets. The City and NCDOT have a history of working in partnership to develop projects. For example, NCDOT and the City have a standing monthly meeting to discuss pedestrian safety issues.

Additionally, the City and NCDOT work with regional partners through the FBRMPO to determine other types of projects. The City of Asheville maintains some larger roads, such as Charlotte Street north of I-240 or WT Weaver Boulevard, smaller streets like Livingston Street, and most streets in downtown Asheville. High scoring corridors maintained by the City of Asheville were placed on the City of Asheville’s Priority Corridor Lists for the ADA and Pedestrian recommendations. When developing projects from these lists, the City of Asheville will lead project development. If any of these projects receive state and/or federal transportation funding, they must follow the state project development process. In addition, the figure below shows the transportation planning and prioritization process that these projects must follow before project development.

Figure 16. Transportation Planning Process: Pre-design Steps for State and Federally Funded Projects.

COMP PLAN

MTP1

SPOT2

TIP3

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

Identify local vision and needs

Identify region’s long range project plan

Identify region’s top projects

Identifty the region’s 10-year funding plan

Develop (construct) Projects

20 - 30 year planning horizon

20 year planning horizon, updated every 5 years

Criteria updated periodically

A 10 year plan that is updated every 2 years

Timing depends on size and scope of project

72 /// GAP Plan /


1. What is an MTP? Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP, previously known as LRTP or Long Range Transportation Plan) The French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization (FBRMPO) maintains this fiscallyconstrained and required planning document that reflects planned transportation investments over the next 25 years. It forecasts changes in the region and seeks to identify transportation improvements needed to keep travelers and goods moving smoothly and how to fund those improvements. The plan is multi-modal and identifies investments in roadway, public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian, rail and aviation projects.

2. Spot Prioritization Process NCDOT uses a strategic, data-driven process to develop the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The process involves scoring all roadway, public transportation, bicycle, pedestrian, rail, and aviation projects on a number of criteria. Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs), and the NCDOT Divisions also contribute to the final project score by assigning local priority points to projects.

3. Transportation Improvement Plan A statewide prioritized listing/program of transportation projects covering a period of four years that is consistent with the long-range statewide transportation plan (LRSTP), metropolitan transportation plans (MTPs), and transportation improvement plans (TIPs), and is required for projects to be eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C. Chapter 53.

of overlapping land use, safety and transportation needs that require a detailed study in order to better define a corridor wide improvement plan. A corridor study provides a detailed look at land use and transportation needs, goals and vision as well as a robust public and stakeholder involvement process. The result is a more vetted and customized range of solutions and recommendations that can move into the project development process. When a corridor study is needed, it is typically completed between the MTP and SPOT phase.

When are Feasibility Studies Done For more complex projects, it may be necessary to perform a high level investigation of physical and environmental constraints in order to better define a project scope and cost. This would be completed before a project moves into the final design process. During the feasibility study, key project risks and opportunities are identified and investigated. The evaluation should include items such as: • Environmental features (e.g. wetlands, threatened and endangered species, waterways) • Physical constraints (e.g. steep slopes, buildings and private property impacts) • Right of way availability (property ownership or the ability to acquire property for facilities) • Utilities and railroad lines More complex projects may require a detailed feasibility study with more robust data collection in order to clearly define the project scope and budget requirements.

4. When are Corridor Studies Completed? Some of Asheville’s busiest corridors are difficult for pedestrians to navigate; however, the ultimate recommendation is not as simple as adding sidewalks. Some of these roadways have a myriad

/

GAP Plan

/// 73


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


5

GREENWAY (G) PLAN AND RESULTS


Greenways, more greenways please. More and more people are walking to destinations instead of driving. We need safe, green spaces to walk through.” - South Asheville Resident

76 /// GAP Plan /


5

G R E E N WAY (G) PLAN AND R E S U LT S

2. Identify new greenway corridors 3. Define and assign new greenway typologies (types) to the network 4. Greenway Network Recommendations and Prioritization

Asheville’s update to the Greenway Plan and recommendations contained within this chapter define desired greenway corridors in Asheville, an approach to prioritizing these projects, and the highest ranked 10 projects that may be advanced in the near-term.

ST EP 1 : REF I NE P RE VIOUSLY P L ANNED G REENWAY AL IG NMENT S

OV ERV IE W

The first step in this effort was to review original greenway corridors as identified in the 2013 plan. These original corridors were either maintained as originally presented, revised, or eliminated if the greenway was identified as infeasible due to land use, right-of-way changes, topography, or other factors.

This plan is an update of the City of Asheville’s 2013 Greenway Master Plan, with a revision to the greenway network. New greenways have been added, refined, or removed. Greenways in the network were then assigned one of three typologies or “types” that better define the greenway’s character and purpose, much like roads have a hierarchical system or functional classification (see glossary). The public has weighed in on the priorities of greenways, which is one factor in final prioritization of the system. Other factors in prioritization include project status (how far along it is), potential for funding, equity, importance to the network, and partnerships that may help get a greenway built. The Destination and Equity scoring (explained in Chapter 4) guided this process to identify areas of need. In summary, this plan chapter is arranged in the following 4 steps: 1. Refine previously planned greenway alignments, including the 2013 Greenway Master Plan

Reviewing the 2013 Greenway Master Plan For Feasibility

A Constructability Analysis Mapping Tool was developed to evaluate factors that challenge greenway construction. The tool informed how greenways in the 2013 plan might be revised to be more constructible. This constructability map can be viewed in Appendix XX. Two specific corridors, the West Asheville RailTrail Greenway and the Beaverdam Greenway, were assessed in more detail to determine project feasibility. These detailed studies can be found in Appendix XX. Based on the constructability analysis, several greenways had been previously planned but have been determined infeasible and have been removed from the planned greenways list. The greenways that have been removed or altered from the greenway plan are as follows:

/ GAP Plan /// 77


• French Broad Greenway West (northernmost section): From Emma Road to Pearson Bridge Road this section was removed after further analysis indicates it is infeasible due to steep grades and exposed bedrock. • Beaverdam Greenway (travelling east of Merrimon Ave.): This greenway was removed as the corridor is very constrained as well as barriers related to small individually owned lots. This route may be considered as a natural surface trail candidate.

ST EP 2: I DENT I F Y NE W G REENWAY CORRI DORS Informed by the Destination and Equity Analysis and the constructability analysis, the Close the GAP project team worked with project partners to define the new, expanded planned greenway network. In searching for new greenway alignments to add to the system, a number of items were reviewed:

• Sandhill Road Greenway: A multi-use path proposed along this road was determined to be extremely difficult due to the potential impact to multiple small private lots, even if part of a road widening project.

• New Road Corridor Projects with Proposed Greenways: Through the State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP), developed with the French Broad River MPO, NCDOT identified roadway projects with complete street elements. See Map 21 for the NCDOT Greenway (Multi-use Paths) Projects City Prioritization Map.

• Hominy Creek Greenway-West: The greenway was realigned to the Pond Road area due to new development patterns which effected the previous alignments feasibility.

• I-26 Connector Greenways: The community identified a major need for connectivity associated with NCDOT’s Interstate 26 widening project. The I-26 area projects are highlighted on Map 21.

Image 19 / The French Broad Greenway Near New Belgium Brewing is an Example of a Spine Greenway (see Defining New Typologies, Image by Equinox).

19

78 /// GAP Plan /


• Areas with Missing Links: The Close the GAP planning process identified areas that lack pedestrian and bicycle facilities, especially in those areas of the City identified as having higher priority based on destinations, equity, connectivity and safety analysis. • Opportunities to Utilize Larger Tracts of Land: Areas of the City with larger parcels or right of way were also identified, as it is typically easier to build greenways when fewer landowners are involved. • Opportunities for New On-Road Greenways: A new type of greenway type was identified—an “onstreet” Neighborhood Greenway that can connect the network in a new way. Read more about this in the section Step 3: Defining New Typologies (Types) where we describe a way to guide greenway planning and development in the City. The results of the redefined and expanded planned greenway network are detailed in Maps (15 - 18) and Tables (8-10).

/

GAP Plan

/// 79


S TEP 3 : D E F I NE A ND A S S IG N N E W T Y PO LO G I E S ( T Y P E S ) Just like a road transportation network, a greenway system can have different levels of service and characteristics based on how many people it will serve, if it is a local or regional connection, or if it has corridor constraints that define how wide the greenway can be. This plan identifies a new set of typologies to guide greenway planning and development in the City. In this plan, each greenway has been assigned a typology that defines the experience, width, easement requirements, and other design characteristics. Each greenway is assigned one of the following typologies: Greenway Spines (See Map 16 and Table 8) are major thoroughfares of the City’s pedestrian/bicycle system. This greenway type carries the highest level of service (carrying capacity, or number of people) and design speed (how quickly a user can travel). It also has the greatest level of investment due to its prominence within the system. It has the greatest width (average 12-14’ or more narrow if a parallel bicycle facility can be established), amenity investment, and name recognition. Greenway Spines travel through entire districts of the City, serving as the “highway” of greenways. Arterial Greenways (See Map 17 and Table 9) serve a secondary means that feed all neighborhoods and sectors of the City into the Greenway Spines. This type of greenway has less amenity investment than spines. They would average 10-12’ and generally feed into more major multi-modal transportation routes (like bus routes or bike lanes) and Greenway Spines.

80 /// GAP Plan /

Imagine an existing neighborhood street that is comfortable enough for a child to bike on as they might on a Greenway Spine: that is a Neighborhood Greenway (See Map 18 and Table 10). This is a new typology to Asheville, and it involves transforming a street to make it more bicycle and pedestrian friendly through enhancements such as intersection features that calm traffic and prioritize access for people walking and biking; wayfinding signage; and branding. Locations for on-street Neighborhood Greenways were selected if they met criteria of having low volume, low speeds, existing traffic calming measures or potential to incorporate traffic calming, and existing or potential for sidewalks. Constructing Neighborhood Greenways with low-cost temporary measures, such as flexible delineators, paint and temporary curbing could serve as an interim measure to determine neighborhood sentiment before a permanent investment is made. Further traffic studies and engineering may be needed for specific design elements. Further detail regarding definitions and standard design criteria for these greenway types can be found in Tables 5 - 7.


Figure 17. Asheville’s New Greenway Types, Including Spine Greenways, Arterial Greenways, Neighborhood Greenways and Natural Surface Trails.

/

GAP Plan

/// 81


Table 5. Typology Details Greenway Greenways Spines are the major “interstates” of the city’s pedestrian/bicycle system.

Photo courtesy of Equinox

Greenway Spine Typology Definition Greenways Spines are the major “highways” of the city’s pedestrian/ bicycle system. This greenway type carries the highest level of service and has the highest design speed. It also has the highest level of investment due to its prominence within the system, width, amenity investment, and “name recognition.”

User Types All type of users. Major transportation routes to access all part of the city. While transportation is its primary service, it can serve as a destination for out of area users and/ or day-long recreation users.

Standard Width

Surface Tread

14’ wide. Min 10’ and up Asphalt greenway to 14’ in anticipated high surface use corridors where space allows. If this width can not be used, parallel active transportation facility should be considered (ie. sidewalks). Optional gravel/ crushed fines shoulder could be used where width can not be met.

Longitudinal Slope: Less than 5% slope for accessibility/ADA compliance

Shoulders*: 16”min./24” max. turf shoulders. *To increase existing greenway width, a 3-4’ rubberized shoulder can be added.

Temporary Construction Easement As needed by existing topography with all built elements located within the greenway easement.

Drainage/Cross Slope: Proper drainage of the trail should be provided and can include 2% crown or cross slope of the trail with a drainage ditch or swale on the inside portion of the trail. 2% in-slope or out-slope can also be used to provide positive drainage along the trail. Typical swale cross sections, 3:1 side slopes max, 1’ base min. Trees should be offset or cleared 6’ from the greenway swale.

Typical Greenway Easement Width 30’ typical. When along a stream or river, extend the easement to the edge of the water body to promote conservation If paralleling a road, a reduced easement may be used.

Level of Service/ Design Speed Major transportation routes, user travel speed and level of service is high, requiring design to accommodate via radii and other means.

Additional Notes Centerline striping of the greenway to address high user volumes may be appropriate. Striping should be used on tight or blind corners, near intersections and under bridges, and other areas where the trail may be confined.

Amenities: High Level of Amenities and Wayfinding Lighting: Lighting will be used on Spine Greenways. Lighting of high traffic areas, intersections with roads, and areas with low visibility are priority. Signage: Once a significant amount of miles are intact, install mile markers for wayfinding and to direct emergency response. Gateway/trailhead signage should be prominent with branded trail names. Trailheads or Nodes Along the Trail: Entrance sign, 5+ parking stalls, dog waste station, trash receptacles, wayfinding map, seating, etc.

82 /// GAP Plan /


Figure 18. Greenway Spine Typology

Greenway Spine Typology

SEE NOTE*

SEE NOTE* *TO EXPAND WIDTH OF EXISTING GREENWAYS, A 3-4’ RUBBERZIED PATHWAY CAN BE ADDED THAT SHOULD BE FLUSH WITH EXISTING GREENWAY

/

GAP Plan

/// 83


Table 6. Typology Details - Arterial Greenways

Arterial Greenways connect neighborhoods to the Greenway Spines.

Arterial Spine Typology Definition

Standard Width

Arterial Greenways serve as a secondary means that feed all neighborhoods and sectors of the City into the greenway spines. They can be used as transportation to access other parts of the City, but also serve as local neighborhood recreation amenities.

12’, where possible, 10’ in constrained areas, down to 8’ in highly constrained short stretches. The greenway could alternatively be a 1012’ sidewalk. Shoulders: 16”Min./24” Max. (Unless a sidepath).

Temporary Construction Easement

User Types Intended for all user types, but especially for shorter transportation routes to connect to greenway spines, or quick access to recreation.

As needed by existing topography with all built elements located within the Greenway Easement.

Surface Tread Asphalt Greenway Surface Alternative Surface Types: These trails can also serve as sidepaths and located where future sidewalks will be installed. Temporary surfaces prior to concrete sidewalks can be constructed as nonpaved crushed stone trails (with proper stormwater management) with a gravel top coated with 3” of smaller angular gravel or crushed fines. Arterial Greenways can also be widened sidewalks (10’) where necessary.

Typical Greenway Easement Width 30’ typical. When along a stream or river, extend the easement to the edge of the water body to promote conservation. If paralleling a road, a reduced easement may be used.

Longitudinal Slope: Less than 5% slope for accessibility/ADA compliance

Drainage/Cross Slope: Proper drainage of the trail should be provided and can include 2% crown or cross slope of the trail with a drainage ditch or swale on the inside portion of the trail. 2% in-slope or out-slope can also be used to provide positive drainage along the trail. Typical swale cross sections, 3:1 side slopes max, 1’ base min. Trees should be offset or cleared 6’ from the greenway swale.

Level of Service/Design Speed Secondary transportation routes, travel speed and level of service is moderate, with a somewhat lower design speed and level of service than the Greenway Spines

Additional Notes Centerline striping of the greenway to address high user volumes may be appropriate. Striping should be used on tight or blind corners, near intersections and under bridges, and other areas where the trail may be restricted or confined.

Amenities: Medium/Low (wayfinding, regulatory, and etiquette signage) Lighting: Lighting is preferred on Arterial Greenways and should be prioritized at intersections, trailheads, at underpasses or to light areas that are enclosed by dense vegetation or topography and not visible from a nearby road, homes or active use area. Signage: Mile marker wayfinding. Wayfinding signage where the greenway intersects with major roads or serve as neighborhood trailheads Trailheads or Nodes Along the Trail: Small trailhead with 2-5 parking stalls, including accessible parking.

84 /// GAP Plan /


Figure 19. Arterial Spine Typology

Arterial Spine Typology

/

GAP Plan

/// 85


Table 7. Typology Details - Neighborhood Greenways

Neighborhood Greenways transform an existing street to make it more bicycle and pedestrian friendly.

Neighborhood Greenway Definition Redesign of an existing neighborhood street to make it more pedestrian and bicycle friendly. A suite of design options contribute to these facilities and slow traffic for safer and more comfortable use.

User Types

Suite of Design Solutions to Develop Neighborhood Greenways

Users Prioritized

Ensure that these streets are prioritized for people walking and biking.

Traffic Calming

Traffic calming measures implemented to maintain low speeds or divert traffic

Intersection Improvements

Wayfinding

Improve crossings, especially of busy streets, to enable people of all abilities to more easily cross the street.

Consistent signage throughout each route, with branded neighborhood greenways signs.

People who desire to travel on enhanced neighborhood streets and other users who want to connect to Arterial, Spine Greenways, and other multi-modal routes.

Amenities: Low (wayfinding, regulatory, and etiquette signage) Lighting: Lighting considered if new sidewalks are proposed. Consider signal treatments for crossing busier streets. Signage: Signage at intersections. Note that further traffic study and engineering is needed to assess the viability of specific Neighborhood Greenways.

86 /// GAP Plan /


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing

/

GAP Plan

/// 87


N ET WO RK RECO M M EN DAT IO NS A ND PRIO RITIZ AT IO N

Figure 20. Next Steps Project Development Definitions Referenced in Tables X-X

Planning (Pre-Design)

Network Recommendations The results of the refined and expanded planned greenway network are shown in Map 15.

This phase is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs.

The maps and tables on the following pages show the results broken down in detail for each greenway type. Each typology has its own table with greenways assigned a short-, medium-, and long-term phasing. These tables will be used to assess over time what projects will go onto the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).

Transportation project development involves many steps from preliminary planning through construction. Chapter 8 of this report details the process as well as necessary public input, which is key to integrate at each stage of project development. Some of the greenway projects in this plan are already in development, and their needed “Next Step” to advance the project is noted in Tables 8 - 10. The stages of development referenced in the tables are described in Figure 20.

Ongoing Community Engagement

More on Project Development Next Steps:

Feasibility Study Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Preliminary Engineering These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost.

Design Full construction document to 100% design ROW (Right of Way) Securing easements or land

Construction Advertise for construction and build it!

88 /// GAP Plan /


Map 15. Combined Greenway Network Map

1 Woodfin

Mile

Beaver Lake

NORTH

26

240 240 40

40

40

Biltmore Estate

Biltmore Forest

26

GREENWAY NETWORK Existing Spine Spine - Under Construction Lake Julian

Greenway Spine Existing Arterial Coll Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway Buncombe County Planned Greenway Potential Other Greenway

AVL Regional Airport

Downtown Asheville City of Asheville

Fletcher

Area Cities

Mills River

/ GAP Plan /// 89


1

Map 16. Greenway Spines Map

Woodfin

S2

Mile

Beaver Lake

NORTH

26

S3

S11

240 240

S9 40

S13 S10 S12

S6

S4 40

S8

40

S5

Biltmore Estate

Biltmore Forest

S7

26

DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE SPINE NETWORK Existing Spine

240

Spine - Under Construction Lake Julian

S11

Greenway Spine Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities

AVL Regional Airport

S13

S1

Fletcher

0.5 Miles

90 /// GAP Plan /

Mills River


Table 8. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Spine Greenways

City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Greenway Spines Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the City’s Top 10 Projects) Map ID #

Greenway Name

Next Steps

S1

Airport Road Greenway

Planning

S2

Beaverdam Extension

Planning

S3

French Broad River North (NRADTIP)

Project Development Notes Work with county to consider integrating into their future plans Work on Extension as priority to connect lake to Woodfin’s Beaverdam Greenway which, sidepath is landowner contingent

Short Term

Medium Term

Extension: Complete all Preliminary

Long Term

Sidepath TBD

Preliminary This project is funded for design Engineering/ Engineering which should begin in 2022 ROW

Design, ROW and Construction

Preliminary Engineering/ ROW

Design, ROW and Construction

S4

Hominy Creek Greenway (East)

Preliminary Engineering

Contingent on some major landowners, middle section led by County

S5

Hominy Creek Greenway (West)

Landowner contingent

May come sooner, if part of a private development

Landowner contingent

S6

French Broad Greenway (Karen Cragnolin Park)

Preliminary Engineering

RiverLink leading implementation

TBD

Feasibility Study

Based on success with West Asheville Rail-with-Trail, this may follow, highly contingent on railroad company willingness to partner

Preliminary Engineering

TBD-based on NCDOT

TBD-based on NCDOT, currently slated for ROW in 2029

S9

Swannanoa River Greenway East (from Bleachery Blvd. Asheville/County Boundary)

Feasibility Study

Corridor mostly owned by the City. Sections not to be done in conjunction with NCDOT projects could become a higher priority if Fonta Flora State Trail funding for construction becomes available through the State

Feasibility Study, Preliminary Engineering/ ROW, Construction

S10

Swannanoa River East Greenway (From Glendale Ave. to Bleachery Blvd.)

Construction

S11

Tunnel Road Greenway

Planning

S12

West Asheville Railwith-Trail

Feasibility Study

S13

West Asheville Greenway

S7

South Asheville Rail-with-Trail

S8

Swannanoa River West Greenway (NCDOT Implemented sections)

Preliminary Engineering

Feasibility Study

Design, ROW

Construction

Full design soon to be complete Construction and soon to be constructed Done in conjunction with Tunnel Road Corridor and commercial redevelopment Highly contingent on railroad company willingness to partner. Engage Emma and Johnston Blvd neighborhoods Part of I-26 Connector project, constructed by NCDOT

TBD, see the Tunnel Road Corridor Study for more details Feasibility Study, Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering, ROW, Design

Design, ROW, Construction

Construction

/

GAP Plan

/// 91


Map 17. Arterial Greenways Map

92 /// GAP Plan /


Table 9. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Arterial Greenways

City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Arterial Greenways Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the City’s Top 10 Projects)

Map ID #

Greenway Name

Next Steps

Project Development Notes

TBD

Greenway being analyzed for potential as a natural surface trail

Short Term Medium Term Long Term

A1

Bacoate Branch Greenway

A2

Bartlett Arms Greenway

Planning

A3

Beaucatcher Greenway

Construction

Full design completed with some adjustments, may need more funding

Re-Design, Construction

A4

Beaver Lake Greenway

Planning

Contingent on one major landowner

Feasibility Study

A5

Beverly Hills Greenway

Feasibility Study Complete after Swannanoa Gwy

A6

Biltmore and McDowell Greenway (Options)

Preliminary Eng.

A7

Biltmore Village Connector

Preliminary Eng. Pairs with Sweeten Creek Gwy

A8

Biltmore Village Sidepaths

Preliminary Eng.

A9

Canie Creek Greenway

Preliminary Eng.

A10 Center Street Greenway Ext.

Planning

Id’d by Shiloh neighborhood

A11

Planning

Connects Chunn’s Cove to city

A12

Chunn’s Cove Greenway Deaverview Greenway

Feasibility Study

TBD

TBD

Planning

Part of a transportation corridor study, two options proposed

Remaining Steps

Preliminary Engineering, Design, ROW, Construction ALL

TBD

TBD

ALL Likely to occur with development of property

Feasibility study paired with W. Asheville Rail-with-Trail

ALL TBD

TBD

Feasibility Study

Preliminary engineering, Design,

Preliminary Eng. Required to be unpaved

ALL

Feasibility Study Pair with Jake Rusher Greenway

ALL

A15 Jake Rusher Greenway

Feasibility Study

A16 Lake Julian Greenway

Feasibility Study Project implemented by county, with support from the City of Asheville

A18 Montford Greenway

Planning

Pair with Hendersonville Rd Multi-use path

Contingent on the Lakeview HOA and NCDOT on Merrimon Ave.

Preliminary Eng. Contingent on one landowner

TBD

ALL

A13 Falconhurst Greenway

Merrimon-Beaver Lake Sidepath

TBD

ALL

A14 Hendersonville Rd. Multi-use Path

A17

TBD

ROW, Construction

F

Planning

Feasibility Study, Preliminary Eng.

Design, ROW, Construction

TBD

TBD

TBD

Construction

Project construction will soon be underway

A20 Oakley East Greenway

Planning

Consider studying Oakley South

ALL

A21

Planning

Consider studying Oakley East

ALL

Planning

May be combo of sidewalk/gwy

ALL

A19 Nasty Branch Greenway

Oakley South Greenway

A22 Overlook Road Greenway A23 Ragsdale Creek Greenway A24

Reed Creek Greenway (North & Downtown Extension)

A25 Rhododendron Creek Greenway A26 Schenck Greenway A27 Smith Mill Creek Greenway

Feasibility Study Contingent on landowner outreach. Feasibility Study

Reed Creek North is a Top 10 Project, Downtown Ext. occurs medium-long term

Feasibility Study One section will be design/build Planning

Construction

TBD

TBD

Feasibility Study

All remaining

Design Construction

All Remaining for on Design/ Build Section

TBD

TBD

Feasibility Study Start after I-26 Connector starts

A28 Sweeten Creek Greenway

A30

Pair with S. Asheville Rail-with-Trail and Biltmore Village Connector

A29 Tunnel Road Connector Greenway

A31

Connects East Asheville to Tunnel Rd

TBD

TBD

ALL

TBD

/

Feasibility Study

All Remaining

TBD

TBD

GAP Plan

/// 93


Map 18. Neighborhood Greenways Map

94 /// GAP Plan /


Table 10. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenways

City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenways Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the proposed Pilot Projects)

Map ID #

Neighborhood Greenway Name

Project Notes

N01

Beachwood Neighborhood Greenway

Uses Beachwood Road, connects Tunnel Rd Grwy to Swannanoa River Grwy

N02

Beaucatcher Neighborhood Greenway

Connects Kennilworth to Beaucatcher Grwy via Samual Ashe Drive, Reservoir Road, and McCauley Drive

N03

Beaverdam Connector Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Glen Falls Road, Carjen Avenue, and Sareva Plaza, connecting to the lake

N04

Busbee Road Connector Arterial Greenway

Travels Busbee Road

N05

College Street Neighborhood Greenway

Travels College Street up to Beaucatcher Greenway

N06

Downtown Loop - East Neighborhood Grwy

Travels Woodfin Street and South Charlotte Street

N07

Downtown Loop - West Neighborhood Grwy

Travels Coxe Avenue, Clingman, Avenue, and Hill Street

N08

Eastwood Road Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Eastwood Road

N09

Emma East Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Emma Hills Drive and Wren Lane

N10

Emma North-South Neighborhood Greenway

Travels North Louisiana Avenue and Adams Hill Road

N11

Fairway Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Gladstone and Edgewood Roads through Asheville City Golf Course

N12

Haw Creek Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Avon Road and Beverly Road

N13

Hazel Mill Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Hazel Mill Road and North Louisiana Avenue

N14

Kennilworth Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Castle Street, Warwick Road, Kennilworth Road, Aurora Drive, and Beaucatcher Road

N15

Kensington Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Kensington and Fairway Drive along Asheville City Golf Course

N16

Kimberly Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Charlotte Street, Edwin Plaza, to Kimberly Ave north to Beaverdam Road

N17

Lakeshore - West Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Lakeshore Drive from Elkwood Road to Shorewood Drive

N18

Lakeshore - East Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Lakeshore Drive from Shorewood Drive to Graceyln Road, ending at Kimberly Avenue

N19

Lower Grassy Branch Neighborhood Grwy

Travels East Azalea Road, Lower Grassy Branch Road, Miller Branch Road, and Old Farm School Road

N20

Malvern Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Manila Street, Sulpher Springs Road, Mimosa Drive, and Bear Creek Road

N21

Oakley East Off Road Option B Arterial Grwy

Travels Liberty Street, Cedar Street, and Cherrio Lane

N22

Oakley East Neighborhood Greenway

Uses some of Future Drive

N23

Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Glendale Avenue and Merchant Street

N24

Oteen Church Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Oteen Church Road, connecting into Azalea Park/Thomas Wolfe Cabin area

N25

Overlook Road Neighborhood Greenway

Connections to Overlook using Deerhaven Lane and Bent Oak Lane

N26

Falconhurst Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Tanglewood Drive, Craggy Avenue, Blue Ridge Avenue, Lanvale Avenue, Olney Road, and Vermont Avenue, connecting Falconhurst Nature Area to West Asheville Park

N27

Richmond Hill Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Richmond Hll Road, Thomas Street, Bingham Road, down Emma Road

N28

River Arts Connector Neighborhood Grwy

Travels Lyman Street, Clingman Avenue, and Depot Streets

N29

Rock Hill Road Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Rock Hill Road, connecting Sweeten Creek Road and Hendersonville Road

N30

Shiloh East-West Neighborhood Greenway

Travles Shiloh Road, Brooklyn Road, Hampton Street, and West Chapel Road

N31

Shiloh North-South Neighborhood Greenway

Travels entirety of Caribou Road from Sweeten Creek Road to Hendersonville Road

N32

South Slope Connector Neighborhood Grwy

Travels Southside Avenue, Short Coxe Avenue, Biltmore Avenue, and Buchanan Avenue

N33

Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway

Travels entirety of Thompson Street from Biltmore Avenue to Glendale Avenue

N34

UNCA Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Mt Clare Avenue and connects into WT Weaver Boulevard

N35

Weaver Park Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Murdock Avenue, Hillside Street, Madison Avenue, East Chestnut Street, and Central Avenue

N36

West Ashevulle River Arts Neighborhood Grwy

Connects Patton Avenue down to Craven Street, and along West Haywood Street

N37

Yorkshire Neighborhood Greenway

Travels Yorkshite Street and connects to London Road

/

GAP Plan

/// 95


N EX T S TEP S TO T H E N EIGH B O R H O O D G R E E NWAY PRO GR A M Given that Neighborhood Greenways direct people on bikes and people walking onto mixed traffic streets, further vetting and analysis of the routes and treatments are required for project development. As such, the next steps for implementation include development of a Neighborhood Greenway Plan and Signage Guide and Implementation of a Pilot Program:

Develop a Neighborhood Greenway Plan and Signage Guide A plan would develop more detailed design criteria, a toolbox of treatments with design details, and detailed recommendations for individual projects. It could also develop guidelines for signage and have signage templates ready for the pilot projects. Determine if a project is a good candidate using criteria defined in the Neighborhood Greenway Plan and suggested here. Further vetting and analysis of the feasibility of neighborhood greenway routes is necessary. Detailed traffic analysis is needed to understand feasibility and scope for each project. All projects should be reviewed based on standard criteria defined in the Neighborhood Greenway Plan. Some suggestion for this criteria could include: • Traffic Conditions are Appropriate: On low volume (<3,000 vehicles per day), low speed (<25 miles per hour) streets. • Connects Missing Gaps: Connects gaps in existing pedestrian/bicycle facilities that are unconnected to the larger corridor. Connects to major greenway, pedestrian, or bicycle infrastructure. • Challenging Gaps to Fill: Locations where bicycle/pedestrian facilities (like sidewalks and greenways) are lacking or challenging to build. • Population Connectivity: Connects to dense or more highly populated areas • Equitable: Connects to areas where there is a high equity/destination score. Continues to balance the distribution of investment in neighborhood greenways throughout the City.

96 /// GAP Plan /

• Neighborhood & Community Support: Is supported by the local neighborhood and the larger public supports it as well. • Safety Improvements Needed: There is a need for traffic calming and/or to improve safety issues for pedestrians/bicyclists. • Opportunities Exist: The corridor can accommodate improvements that will greatly increase safety and functionality for pedestrians and bicyclists (traffic calming, separated pedestrian/bicycle facilities, etc.). • Supports Existing Plans & Goals: The improvements are aligned with one or more City or other organization sponsored plans and overall goals. Determine who will lead further design and implementation The design can be done in-house, by consultants, or by a partner; the project can be implemented through temporary materials (e.g., paint and flexible delineators) or by more permanent measures.

NEIG H B ORHOOD G REENWAY P I LOT RECOMMENDAT ION S Pilot projects are identified based on the prioritization methodology explained earlier. Pilot projects were also chosen for the size of population and neighborhoods they would serve, for their connectivity to Arterial or Spine Greenways, and are based on balanced distribution across the City. Recommended Pilot Neighborhood Greenway Projects (listed by order of importance): 1. Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway: This project is the top project as it will serve as an interim connection for the Swannanoa River Greenway before the NCDOT improvements are developed (as part of the project #U-5832). Thompson Street from Biltmore Avenue to Glendale Avenue could ensure that Biltmore Village is connected to East Asheville. 2. Lakeshore Neighborhood Greenway: This project was voted as one of the top priorities by the public. Note that this project can, in sections, serve as a multi-use path with an Arterial Greenway typology but will most likely be designed to be a Neighborhood Greenway where constraints don’t allow for a full multi-use path. Further study is needed to determine the final mix of design and typologies.


20

Image 20 / Street Redesign is a Component of Implementing Neighborhood Greenways. (image by Alyson West)

3. Malvern Neighborhood Greenway: This project would connect the existing Hominy Creek Greenway on-street to the Hawthorne at Bear Creek Apartments, where it can be off-street and connect into existing pathways at Malvern Hills Park. A final connection would be from the park to Patton Avenue. 4. Downtown Neighborhood Greenway Loop: This loop would take users around the outer edge of downtown and make important connections to Spine Greenways and other neighborhood greenways. Some of this loop already has existing bike lanes, sidewalks, and traffic calming measures. The Coxe Avenue and South Lexington Avenue Complete Streets Design project segment of this loop can serve as a first phase of implementation.

the Oakley neighborhood to the Swannanoa River Greenway using Merchant Street and Glendale Avenue. 6. Beaverdam Connector Neighborhood Greenway: This would connect Beaverdam Lake to Elkwood Avenue. This short stretch makes a critical connection from the Beaver Lake to the Woodfin boundary, where Woodfin’s future Beaverdam Creek Greenway will connect. 7. Haw Creek/Kensington Neighborhood Greenway: This project would connect the Haw Creek and Beverly Hills neighborhoods to the Swannanoa River Greenway.

5. Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway: This project would serve as the primary connection of

/

GAP Plan

/// 97


1

Map 19. Neighborhood Greenways Pilot Project Map

Woodfin

N3 N17

Mile

Beaver Lake

26

NORTH

N18

N6 N7 N28

240

N12

240

N32 N15 40

N20

N33 N23

40

40

Biltmore Estate

Biltmore Forest

26

DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAY PILOT PROJECTS

240

Pilot Projects

N6

Downtown Asheville

Lake Julian

City of Asheville Area Cities N7

AVL Regional Airport

Fletcher N28

N32

0.5 Miles

98 /// GAP Plan /

Mills River


Table 11. City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Projects

City of Asheville Greenway Network Phasing Plan: Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Projects Project Phasing Notes (Project in Bold are the City’s Top 10 Projects) Map ID #

Greenway Name

Next Steps

Project Development Notes

Short Term

Medium Term

Long Term

Planning

TBD

TBD

N3

Beaverdam Connector Neighborhood Greenway

Planning

N6, N7, & N32

Downtown Neighborhood Greenway Loop

Planning, some sections completed or being studied

Likely will be broken into implementation sections with Coxe/Lexington Ave. being the first to implement

Planning

TBD

TBD

N12 & N15

Haw Creek/Kennsington Neighborhood Greenway

Planning

Phase in when the Swannanoa River Greenway will be built

Planning

TBD

TBD

N17 & N18

Lakeshore Neighborhood Greenway

Planning

May be partially an Arterial Greenway and partially this typology. TBD based on a more detailed study

Planning

TBD

TBD

N20

Malvern Neighborhood Greenway

Planning

Connects much of Malvern Hills to Patton Ave., two parks and commercial

Planning

TBD

TBD

N23

Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway

Planning

Connects much of the Oakley Neighborhood to the Swannanoa River Greenway

Planning

TBD

TBD

Construction

Soon to go into construction

Construction

Preliminary Engineering

Interim improvements to make a safe connection for the Swannanoa River Greenway

ALL

South Slope and River N28 & Arts Neighborhood N32 Greenway Connector

N33

Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway

See the following page for a more detailed description of each of the pilot projects

/

GAP Plan

/// 99


S TEP 4 : TH E PRIO RITIZ AT IO N P RO C E S S A N D RES ULT S Factors Determining Project Priorities Several factors were weighed to develop the top implementation projects. This includes projects at all stages of development, from those that are just referenced in this plan, to those that are “shovel ready” (ready for construction). The determining factors that elevate greenways to the highest ranking are: Project Development Stage Status, Including Funding Status Stages of project development sequentially include: (1) documented in a plan; (2) a full feasibility study has been developed; (3) construction documents and permitting are completed; (4) recent cost estimates are available and complete, making it a “shovel ready” project; and (5) full or partial funding is secured and the project is awaiting the bidding process. Importance to the Entire Greenway Network’s Connectivity Greenways that are important to regional connectivity, like the Greenway Spines, are priorities, as are greenways that connect whole areas of the City to these Greenway Spines. Additionally,the Greenway Spines that serve as the backbone to the Hellbender Regional Trail System (see Map 16) were given a high priority. Equity Greenways that connect areas of the City with high Equity and Destination scores were prioritized. Additionally, greenways are prioritized so that they are equitably distributed across the City. Legacy neighborhoods may require stabilization plans prior to project implementation. This evaluation may result in revised projects, as well as delays to address stabilization efforts. For more information see Chapter 8, the Pre-Design Project Development Checklist. Potential for Funding. Greenways that align with transportation funding criteria, or other funding opportunities, are most likely to be funded, regardless of where they fall on the priority list. Typical criteria include opportunity to spur economic development and tourism, improve access, and alignment with community plans.

100 /// GAP Plan /

Partnerships that Advance Development Partnerships with the MPO or NCDOT, as well as other regional partners (e.g., the Fonta Flora State Trail) or willing private landowners, can elevate the likelihood of greenway implementation. Project Development Status When looking at the top priorities for funding greenways, it is important to consider projects that have momentum and support and have already been partially funded and are in development. Community Input Once the full list of greenway corridors was identified and assigned a typology, the community was asked to weigh in on their priority Arterial and Neighborhood Greenways in an online survey. Since the Greenway Spines are the highest priority, often associated with larger roadway or redevelopment projects, and critical to the network, the Project Team decided to have the public only weigh in on the Arterial Greenways and Neighborhood Greenways.

Public Input Summary Table 12 shows the top ranking greenways based on public input and includes selected public comments that are representative of each greenway that ranked higher. Secondary Priority The following projects received a fewer amount of public votes than the high-medium priority projects, but did receive a minimum of three votes each. • Rhododendron-Falconhurst Neighborhood Greenway • Richmond Hill Neighborhood Greenway • Weaver Park Neighborhood Greenway • Montford Arterial Greenway • Chunn’s Cove Arterial Greenway • Beaucatcher Neighborhood Greenway • Shiloh Neighborhood Connections (multiple) • Fairway Neighborhood Greenway • Haw Creek Arterial Greenway


Table 12. Public Input Results and Comments (Arterial Neighborhood Greenways Below are Listed in Order of Public Rankings)

Arterial Greenways

Neighborhood Greenways

Lakeshore Greenway/Lakeshore Neighborhood Greenway: “Important route for pedestrians and bikers but there isn't enough safe space. Lots of commuter traffic.”

Downtown Loop Neighborhood Greenway: “It will open up safe connections between the Mountainside Park/ Southside area and North Asheville.”

Beaverdam Extension Greenway: “This will be essential in completing a safe way to navigate from Lakeshore to Merrimon.” “Very important to improve walkability of this segment.”

Kimberly Neighborhood Greenway: “This is a really valuable relief street for anyone walking or riding bikes going north/south and not wanting to deal with Merrimon. I use it all the time!”

Reed Creek Greenway: “So so important. Connecting the existing greenway network with the river is a must. Plenty of people are already walking/biking out this way and it is not safe.”

UNCA Neighborhood Greenway: “Great start, needs to connect more thoroughly to UNCA campus and Botanical Gardens and Broadway beyond.”

Amboy Sidepath Greenway: “Creating a separate (high speed) path would significantly improve the utility of Amboy Road as a 'commuting' route into the city.” Note, there were many comments about the need to improve the Amboy Bridge over the French Broad River.

River Arts Neighborhood Greenway: “This is an important connection between West Asheville/RAD and the South Slope and into downtown. It is nice because it is along a street that by design slows drivers down and makes it more comfortable to ride on.”

Sweeten Creek Greenway: “This would be an extremely beneficial connection between parts of south Asheville and downtown (and beyond). As of now, I would not ride my bike with my daughter or by myself from South Asheville to downtown. There is no safe route that prioritizes bikes let alone pedestrians of any kind.”

Malvern Neighborhood Greenway: “This is a major connection for West Asheville; it would enable a lot of residents in West Asheville to access the park in that area and not have to drive. Parking is limited and it would make it much safer for everyone wishing to use the park.”

Biltmore/McDowell Greenway: “The best option for safely expanding multimodal travel between downtown and Biltmore Village.”

Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway: “This is super important to connecting Oakley to the outside world. Oakley is one of the most boxed in areas in the city tracks on both sides, I-240, and sidewalks roads on both sides of the Swannanoa.”

Canie Creek Greenway: “The Canie Creek space is an important greenspace for the Malvern Hills neighborhood already, making it formal and connecting it to other greenways would give our neighborhood more walking access and possibly better walking commutes.”

Oakley West Neighborhood Greenway:“This will represent one of the safest ways for Oakley residents to make their way to the Swannanoa River Greenway... We would also like slow street connections via East Street and via Stoner Road.”

Rhododendron Creek Greenway: ”Good connection point for W. Asheville residents to hop on at the park or Sand Hill Road.” Smith Mill Creek Greenway: “This is an important connection that is currently very challenging to make on a bicycle.” Reed Creek Extension Greenway: “Would improve access between Reed Creek greenway and points south.” Ragsdale Greenway: “This would see high use since it would connect/extend the popular Hominy Creek greenway.”

/

GAP Plan

/// 101


TO P 10 PRIO R I T Y G R E E NWAY PRO JECTS F O R T H E C I T Y OF A S H E V IL L E The following are the top priority greenway projects that the City of Asheville should advance. They are listed in order of importance. Note that some of these may contain portions of NCDOT projects which are detailed in their own section on page 105. Greenways that will be built solely as NCDOT projects are described there as well. Neighborhood Greenways are not included in this list but pilot projects have been suggested further on page 96. The following list briefly describes each project, its status, and factors for ranking this project as a “top” project.

1 / Swannanoa Greenway (Greenway Spine) The Swannanoa Greenway is a top priority for the City and is a major east-west connection of the regional Hellbender Trail Network. This includes multiple implementation stages with two NCDOT projects, the Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway as an interim measure, and City-led sections. This is also part of the Fonta Flora State Trail.

2 / Beaucatcher Greenway (Arterial Greenway) This project would complete the envisioned “River to Ridge” initiative of connecting greenways from the French Broad River, through downtown, and up to Beaucatcher. Construction documents have been completed for the greenway and it has partial funding. Some redesign is being considered to lessen the cost and preserve trees. This project ranks high due to its near completion status.

3 / Reed Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) The City has received funding to initiate a feasibility study for this greenway. The City will need to secure funding for full construction documents and construction. This would include the uncompleted sections north to Broadway and south to downtown.

4 / French Broad River Greenway North (NRADTIP) (Greenway Spine) This greenway would connect the existing French Broad River and Wilma Dykeman Greenway north to the planned Woodfin Greenway. It is a critical regional greenway and part of the Hellbender Trail Network.

Figure 21. A Portion of the Soon to be Constructed Swannanoa River Greenway (from Glendale Avenue to Bleachery Boulevard).

102 /// GAP Plan /


5 / Hominy Creek Greenway East (Greenway Spine) This segment connects West Asheville, Shelburne Road, and the existing Hominy Creek Greenway to the Farmers Market and Hominy Creek Park. Buncombe County has received funding from the French Broad MPO through the NCDOT’s Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) process to do preliminary engineering for the greenway section that connects the French Broad Greenway to the WNC Farmers Market. The unfunded portion is the section from the Farmers Market to Shelburne Road.

6 / West Asheville Rail-with-Trail Greenway and Deaverview Connector (Greenway Spine) This packages a regional Greenway Spine (the railwith-trail) with a greenway that connects to Roger Farmer Memorial Park and affordable housing in the Deaverview neighborhood. Other than a constructability analysis done for this plan (which is detailed in Step 1 and Step 2 of this Chapter) no further study has been done. A greenway feasibility study is the first step for this project. This project ranks high due to its regional connectivity, access to many neighborhoods and commercial areas, and broad service to an area of the City that has one of the higher destination and equity scores. Working with the legacy neighborhoods (like the Emma community) surrounding this corridor will be a critical initial step.

9 / South Asheville Rail-with-Trail/ Sweeten Creek Road Greenway (Spine and Arterial Greenways) A greenway/multi-use path on Sweeten Creek Road is needed to connect the South Asheville Rail-withTrail into Biltmore Village and to the Swannanoa River Greenway. Further discussions with Watco-Blue Ridge Southern Railroad are needed prior to initiating a feasibility study.

10 / Smith Mill Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) This greenway starts near the Falconhurst Preserve and parallels Patton Avenue, ultimately connecting into the greenway that will be traveling over Bowen Bridge. The City’s Parks Department analyzed the feasibility of the greenway through a report.

7 / Hendersonville Road Multi-use Path and Jake Rusher Greenway (Arterial Greenways) Two different greenways link together to create a connection to Lake Julian and Jake Rusher Parks. It is critical that the Lake Julian Greenway is advanced simultaneously (led by the County) to make a complete connection. This project is important because it provides connection to commercial development, two parks, and benefits an area that is under-served by pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure.

8 / Rhododendron Creek Greenway (Arterial Greenway) Rhododendron Creek connects West Asheville Park and the surrounding neighborhoods to the Hominy Creek Greenway. The City has acquired some of the easements needed to complete this greenway. Due to this being a short segment, bypassing feasibility into preliminary engineering is recommended.

/

GAP Plan

/// 103


2

Map 20. Top Greenway Projects Map

Miles

Woodfin

NORTH

Beaver Lake 26

3

4 240

6 10

2 240

2

40

1 8 40

1

9

40

5

Biltmore Estate

Biltmore Forest

26

9

TOP TEN GREENWAY PROJECTS

DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE

Lake Julian

240

Greenway Spine Arterial Greenway

7

Greenway Network Components Downtown Asheville

26

City of Asheville Area Cities

AVL Regional Airport

2 Fletcher

2 2

104 /// GAP Plan /

Mills River


N CDOT GR E E NWAY ( M U LTI-USE PAT H S ) PRO JECTS P R IO R I T I Z AT ION

• Bleachery Boulevard/Swannanoa Road to Azalea Park (NCDOT project #U-6046): construction anticipated beyond 2030. • Thompson Street Neighborhood Greenway: Interim improvements will make it a much improved connection to the existing greenway project. See more about this in the Neighborhood Greenway section of this plan.

The following are projects that NCDOT would be involved with or lead as the manager of state roads. The projects are typically a part of road corridor improvement studies that include complete street measures. Much of NCDOT’s prioritization of projects may change due to a funding shortfall, so the timelines indicated below will likely change. Note that NCDOT and other transportation organizations typically refer to greenways as multi-use paths.

2. North RADTIP (French Broad River Greenway): Right of way acquisition is anticipated for 2025 and construction for 2029. This is packaged as part of the I-26 connector projects below. NCDOT will lead the design and construction of the greenway from Pearson Bridge Road to the planned Woodfin Greenway (Riverside Road/ Broadway interchange).

NCDOT Projects and Corridor Studies that Include Greenway Elements

3. I-26 Connector Project Greenway Improvements: Construction is anticipated in stages, beginning in 2024 for the downtown sections. The City’s Transportation and Planning & Urban Design Departments will study plans to ensure that there are neighborhood connections to the pedestrian/bicycle facilities built with this project . Also of note, significant NCDOT right of way will be purchased in the area of the Smith Mill Creek. The City should explore future options to build the Smith Mill Greenway and also explore ways to incorporate natural surface trails in this area as part of Asheville Unpaved.

Map 21 illustrates the locations of the numbered projects listed below. 1. Swannanoa River Greenway: • Meadow Road (NCDOT project #U-4739): construction is anticipated in 2029. • Biltmore Avenue to Glendale Avenue (NCDOT project #U-5832) construction anticipated beyond 2030. This is deemed by the City as the highest priority of all projects. The City is looking at the entire Swannanoa River Road corridor as an opportunity for urban revitalization and a chance to move the road away from the river which floods and is eroding. The greenway will be part of a broader project that is envisioned for the entire corridor.

21

Image 21 / Proposed West Asheville Greenway as part of I-26 Connector Project. (Source: French Broad River Metropolitan Planning Organization Governing Board Presentation, 015)

/

GAP Plan

/// 105


\7 22

Image 22 / Hendersonville Road Proposed Multi-use Path (After) south of Long Shoals Road Entering the City of Asheville. (Source: Hendersonville Road Corridor Study, 2021)

4. Sweeten Creek Road Greenway: (NCDOT project #U-2801A) A 10-foot multi-use path is proposed along the entire five-mile length of the Sweeten Creek Road corridor. NCDOT is considering removing this project from the State Transportation Improvement Plan list due to funding shortfalls. 5. Hendersonville Road: The majority of Hendersonville Road was evaluated in a corridor study led by the French Broad River MPO. A fivemile greenway/multi-use path was incorporated into recommendations. The plan recommends building the first segment from Rock Hill Road to the Walmart Super Center. Note that another segment of this corridor is prioritized in this plan’s Top 10 Greenway Priority Projects. 6. Tunnel Road: This corridor was also studied by the French Broad River MPO where the City identified the need for improved pedestrian and bicycle access. Results from the Tunnel Road Corridor Study indicate that sections of the studied corridor (Beaucatcher Tunnel to the South Tunnel/ Swannanoa River Road intersection) have excess capacity, meaning there is potential space to reallocate roadway use for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Each segment of the roadway addressed in the study includes a “Road Space Reassignment within Existing Right-of-Way” and a “Road Space

106 /// GAP Plan /

Reassignment (with Development)” scenario with cross sections that illustrate recommended multimodal facilities. In most cases, the recommendation is for a multi-use path or some type of separated facilities that dedicate more space to bicyclists and pedestrians. 7. Craven Street Bridge: Craven Street Bridge connects the French Broad River West Greenway with the Wilma Dykeman Greenway. A small sidewalk on the bridge is heavily trafficked by greenway users, often forcing them onto the road when there are multiple users. Improvements to this bridge are needed to better accommodate greenway users. 8. Biltmore Avenue/McDowell Corridor Study: The Biltmore Avenue and McDowell Street Corridor Study evaluated Biltmore Avenue, McDowell Street/Asheland Avenue, and Southside Avenue for changes that may better service all modes of transportation. The plan recommends 19 project segments that include an advisory shoulder, neighborhood greenways (termed bicycle boulevards in the study), one-way separated bike lanes, segments with sharrows, a sidepath and a two-way separated bike lane.


1 Map 21. NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Projects

Mile

Woodfin

NORTH

Beaver Lake 26

2

6 3 240

240

7 40

8 1 40

4

40

Biltmore Estate

Biltmore Forest

26

5 OTHER PLANNED PROJECTS Adopted Study with a MUP

DOWNTOWN ASHEVILLE

Discuss with City 240

Lake Julian

6

I-26 Improvements STIP Funded Downtown Asheville City of Asheville

26

Area Cities

3

AVL Regional Airport Fletcher

8 Mills River

/ GAP Plan /// 107


rch Conne ctor

y

Gr

wa

er

en

w

ay

Oteen Chu

rch Conne ctor

Oteen Chu

aT -Se to

ek

ilo h Gr

ee n w a y

40

40

l rai

Sw

an

no a na

Ri

v

le Oak ut h So

NCDOT project Future planning & design Constructed/soon to be constructed

Mounta ins -

Sh

40

n ee

Swannanoa Greenway Status

y

ty

as

N

F ai r o n wa y nec tor

Do

co

Ba

0

0.5

1 Mile

SWA NNAN OA RIVER G R EEN WAY Shi Est- loh Wst .

INVESTMENT LEVEL

$$$$$ (Multi-million dollar project) Costs will include design, ROW, an construction with 1-2 major bridge spans of the Swannanoa River. Next steps include pre-design activities like traffic analysis, public engagement, and other steps to inform more detailed design.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

RR OAD

EET Image to right shows shorter and long-term options for the corridor.

IVE ANO AR SWA NN

PS ON OM

• Description: This 10-14’ greenway is the city’s major east-west connection running along the Swannanoa River. It connects commercial, Biltmore Village, West Asheville, Oakley, and East Asheville, and Biltmore Village.

ST R

• Length: 8.77 miles

108 /// GAP Plan /

A

B

• Greenway Type: Spine

TH

Wil m a

Kennilworth Greenway

wn

te

Be a Gr ucat ee nw cher ay

to

wn

Sw eet en Cr e

r

ey W nw e ay st

y East Oakle way Green

3.04 Miles /Amboy Rd to Biltmore Ave

St re et

re G r e ann an o a Riv Azalea Park

Rive nano a Swan enw a y Gre nt y ) (Cou

s on

y

t

Th

p om

l ak ee O Gr

es

er

a Ri v er

CC

Sw

ills

ell

rW

B

an o

e Gr

ay

wa

ow

ell Dow

cD

Mc

ve

Sw

n an

A

w en

er

en

on gt

re

County-Planned Greenway

in ns

1.13 Miles

Bev

Gre

H ly

Ke

n w ay

ranch ss y B G ra way en Gre

e

M

o re

Potential Other Greenway Mountains-to-Sea Trail

Gr e

tm

Neighborhood Greenway

1.39 Miles

oad

Bil

Biltm o

Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway

3.18 Miles

el R

Greenway Spine

EAST ASHEVILLE

L o w er

nn

Existing Spine

Soon To Be Constructed Spine

d Riv

Haw Creek

Weaver Park

Tu

Greenway Type

West

rly Kimbe

1

ford

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

Note that the City wants to look at a larger project area that may mean the greenway and road are not constrained to the road’s current footprint. Actual greenway alignment is to be determined.


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

3-lane road section at intersections, middle lane tappers away as road leaves intersections.

SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD (WEST SECTOIN

A

COMMERCIAL/ PRIVATE PROPERTY

12-foot Greenway

(RE-DESIGN)

Maintained riparian edge

Existing Utilities

Swannanoa River

Buffer varies Min. 5’ Average 10’

SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD

Existing Guardrail

GREENWAY

5’Buffer

EXISTING SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

A. Greenway designed and built as part of NCDOT road redesign project as part of a larger city-driven Swannanoa River Road (Road revitalization and flood control project. Greenway is Associated Segments: proposed to be on the north side of Swannanoa River 1-A Road.

Re-design)

B. Thompson Street Advisory Bike Lanes (or yield condition Notes of Interest: roadway) can serve as an interim connection until there-design where significant takeings occur. Only feasible in case of road NCDOT sections along Swannanoa River Road can be B built. C. Greenway section near the Municipal Course would be designed and built as part of a NCDOT road redesign project. The greenway would be on the south side of the road.

Advisory Bike Lanes on Thompson Street can serve as an interim connection for the greenway.

Simpson Street- On-Street Greenway Connector (Examp

4 Existing utility

C

Existing Swannanoa River road

Existing utility

Associated Segments:

8-12-foot Greenway

Reduced river buffer

5-C

Potential floodplain impacts

Notes of Interest:

SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD (EAST SECTOIN

On-street paint can act as traffic calming • Road has minimal local traffic

5’Buffer

Existing fence

EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTING CITY OWNED GOLF COURSE

SWANNANOA RIVER ROAD

GREENWAY Swannanoa River Retaining wall height varies in size and Greenway may need railing in some locations Represents slope in areas of most constricted space

Swannanoa River Road (No Road Re-design) GAP Plan Associated Segments:

D-2

E-2

/

E-3

/// 109


BEAUC ATC HER GREEN WAY

0

Greenway Type

500

1,000 Ft

Kimberly

Existing Spine

Weaver Pa rk

INVESTMENT LEVEL

Soon To Be Constructed Spine Greenway Spine

Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway

Beucatcher is mostly funded. Even the design is revised, it may be close to being shovel ready.

Potential Other Greenway

Tun

nel

t Colleg e S C o n n e ct o r

$$$$$

County-Planned Greenway

Beaucatcher Greenway Status

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

City-led project

• Greenway Type: Arterial Greenway

Ro

ad

Gre

enw ay

NOR

wn

A

N

Natural surface trails proposed in Mountainside this area

IO

D

Be G auc re a en tc w he ay r

K

Do

1

E

A

2

Be a Gr uc ee atc nw he ay r

SO

UT HE

RN

SE CT

Park

KENILWORTH Bi lt m or e Av e

ell ow cD t. B ) e M Op or ay ( l tm nw B i r ee G

Existing conditions and future example of the greenway

e nilwort

N SE CTIO

N

Loo or ect onn tow

nC

B

reen w ay hG

C

p

• Description: Connects Memorial Stadium to the historic Helen’s Bridge and a spur trail to connect to the future White Fawn Overlook Park. The City plans to modify full construction documents to be able to build access sections at both ends that enhance public access and safety and can be built with existing funds.

110 /// GAP Plan /

240

DOWNTOWN

• Length: 1.25 miles

THER

2

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

KEY ELEMENTS

SOUTHERN SECTION

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

MCCORMICK FIELD

HI

W

MEMORIAL STADIUM

MEMORIAL STADIUM CONNECTOR

Natural surface trails proposed in this area

DR

C. The Greenway connects to Beaumont Street. Beaumont Street will be improved to allow for separated pedestrian/ bicycle facilities. The greenway terminates at Helen’s Bridge.

TE

DR

ER

B. The northern section travels along Ardmion Park with some minor safety improvements as it travels on-road,

N

W FA

D AN EX AL

A. The southern section will be improved, unpaved roadbed to allow for drainage and improved surface, but will remain unpaved. A connection to Memorial Stadium will be made and it is yet to be determined whether it is paved or unpaved.

WHITE FAWN RESEVOIR RES

BEUACATCHER GREENWAY

EVO IR R

D

R

ER D

AND

X ALE

NORTHERN SECTION

D. A natural surface trail system of 3-4 miles of trail is proposed in Mountainside Park surrounding the greenway.

I

RK

E TH

IN

T AR

NG

JR

DR

LU

M

R

ON

DE AN

M AU

EX

BE

AL

E. The greenway would ultimately connect to the future proposed White Fawn Park, which could also serve as a small trailhead.

TS

DR

T M AU

BE

AR

R DR

ANDE

ALEX

K

ION P

ARDM

T

PK

TS

IO N

ON

DM

BEUACATCHER GREENWAY

/

GAP Plan

/// 111


3

ee d

Cr ee k

D

Gr ee nw

y reenwa Emma G

240

PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Arterial • Length: 1.13 miles • Description: Includes Reed Creek North from the existing greenway to Riverside Drive/Woodfin municipal boundary and the downtown connection south from the existing greenway.

Placemaking on the existing greenway section

112 /// GAP Plan /

Re

. tr ec n t n es Co W n ow op nt Lo

E

w

C

A Feasibility study is funded ($50,000) and soon to be underway. Remaining actions are design, ROW acquisition, and construction.

ee

Do

INVESTMENT LEVEL

ed

nw

r dG

or

ntf

Mo

ay

F

k

ee

Cr

Down

0

1,000

town Con n Loop

tor ec

y rw

rth No er iv ch Bro a d R er Fren Riv French Broa d

aG m

ill H d r on to m ec ch n Ri Con

0.56 Miles

R EED CREEK GREEN WAY $$$$$

ay

Kimberly Greenwa y

Rive r

road ch B Fren

ill Conn ector

Richm ond H

h Frenc Broad

y

a nw

Ri ve r

l

e re kG ar

C

26

MONTFORD

sheville Rail Trail st A We

rP

0.57 Miles

Soon to be analyzed in a feasibility study

Em

ve

ay

R

Reed Creek Greenway Status

nw

ea

County-Planned Greenway

B

ree

W

Potential Other Greenway

kG

r to

Neighborhood Greenway

ee

ec

Arterial Greenway

Glen

Cr

nn Co

Existing Arterial Greenway

ed

eek Cr

CA

Greenway Spine

Re

s n'

N

Soon To Be Constructed Spine

A

U

Existing Spine

French Broad River

Greenway Type

Nort h

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

Richmon

2,000 Ft

Tu Ro


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

D

E

LEFT: The newest section of the greenway to be built RIGHT: This pedestrian overpass crossing of I-240 will be improved with the I-26 Connector project and will be a critical link to downtown and the Downtown Neighborhood Greenway Loop

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

F

A. Reed Creek will connect to French Broad North (NRADTIP) Greenway at the intersection of Riverside Road and Broadway. The Future NCDOT I-26 Project will redesign this intersection at which point a much safer crossing should be integrated into design. B. This section may go on the north side of Broadway (on University of North Carolina property) or on the south side of Broadway. The feasibility study will determine this.

Location to be determined

C. Existing placemaking and branding of the greenway can be integrated into future segments. D. The southern section is the newest to be built. E. The pedestrian overpass to be improved as part of I-26 Connector project. F. A feasibility study will determine how the greenway will travel on Hill Street.

Pedestrian Overpass Crossing

E

/

GAP Plan

/// 113


4

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

0

$$$$$ hm Riicll H

• Description: The City is leading a the 1.27-mile section along the French Broad River. At Pearson Bridge Road, the greenway would cross at-grade and then parallel Riverside Drive as a multi-use path for another 0.56 miles. This section would be led by NCDOT.

Br

Cr

ee

oa

kG

dw

ay

1,000 Ft

re

St

en

wa

y

Greenway Type Existing Spine

R

Soon To Be Constructed Spine Greenway Spine

r dR ive

• Length: 1.83 miles

0.56 Miles

C

French Broa

• Greenway Type: Spine

r

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

ed

D

n so St ar e Pe idg Br

A feasibility study already completed and led by Buncombe County. Design, ROW acquisition and construction are next steps. The City anticipates engaging consultants to assist with the design process in 2022.

Re

Fren ch (Nor Broad R th R ADT iver IP)

INVESTMENT LEVEL

E

r

mond Hill Con Rich necto

ve ch Broad Ri Fren

F R E NCH BROAD G REEN WAY ( NOR TH R ADTIP)

500

Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway Potential Other Greenway

26

County-Planned Greenway

French Broad Greenway (North RADTIP) Status NCDOT to make improvements as part of Riverside Drive Project

nt

B

th or (N

fo

rd

Gr

wy

DT RA ) IP

114 /// GAP Plan /

Tra il

tor

Mo

r ve

R a il

er Riv

ille

ec

D. The greenway is proposed as a multi-use path along Riverside Drive from Pearson Bridge to Broadway due to railroad constraints along the river. E. The Broadway/Riverside Drive intersection will be redesigned as part of the Future I-26 project. The Woodfin Blueway Greenway design (led by the County) is underway and travels north for several more miles.

ll

Ri

Hi

French Br o ad

W. Ash

ev

C. The greenway is proposed to travel alongside the river which is still largely industrialized in this area. It is proposed to cross on-grade at Pearson Bridge Road.

Richm on d

nn Co

B. The I-26 Connector project will have new elevated freeway connection that travels over this area and ties into the existing I-26.

C French B road

A. The proposed greenway connects into the existing Wilma Dykeman and French Broad Greenways just north of the Norfolk Southern railroad bridge over the French Broad River.

City-led; soon to be developed construction documents

1.27 Miles

Mi Smith

ek re C l l

A eville t Ash ay s e W nw Gree

240

v il le

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

h e ts As A r . W v er Ri

r. ct n C


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

C

's

nn

e Gl

ed

Re

Cr ee k

TYPICAL GREENWAY PROPOSED ALONG RIVERSIDE DRIVE

ek

e Cr

TYPICAL GREENWAY PROPOSED ALONG THE RIVER

Example Intersection Modifications: Shorten pedestrian crossing, image from the NC 251/ Riverside Drive Greenway Feasibility Study

Top of Bank Varies

French Broad River

Example Intersection Modifications: Shorten pedestrian crossing, image from the NC 251/Riverside Drive Greenway Feasibility Study

D

/

GAP Plan

/// 115


5

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

Hominy Creek Greenway

Neighborhood Greenway Potential Other Greenway

way

County-Planned Greenway

240

B

Hominy Creek Greenway Status Buncombe County-led STIP project City-led connections

Ho mi ny

e Cre t es

1

R ad

dR ay Broa nw ree rG ive

h Br o

40

KEY ELEMENTS

C Ho m y in

re

C

B. Decommissioned bridge, proposed as a greenway focal point overlooking Hominy Creek.

iver

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

A. Connect to greenways via high visibility crosswalk at Shelburne Road to connect to future Rhododendron Creek Greenway, and connection to existing Hominy Creek Greenway.

ch Fren

c Fren

kW

• Description: Connects the existing Hominy Creek Greenway and West Asheville to the WNC Farmers Market. From there, it connects to the French Broad River Greenway and Hominy Creek River Park.

Arterial Greenway

French Broa d Riv er

• Length: 1.08 miles (0.56 for City-led sections)

Existing Arterial Greenway

ek G reen

• Greenway Type: Spine

Greenway Spine

Bent Cre

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Soon To Be Constructed Spine

A

$$$$$ County leading middle portion to connect further south along Highway 191. The City would need to lead sections to ensure connectivity to city greenway and parks.

Existing Spine

Rhododendron Creek

HO MIN Y CR E E K GREEN WAY INVESTMENT LEVEL

Greenway Type

WEST ASHEVILLE

ek

Ea

D

E

st

2

C. Connect to the WNC Farmers Market led by Buncombe County. D. Bridge would be required to cross Hominy Creek to get to French Broad River Greenway and Hominy Creek Park. E. Exact alignment to be determined and should minimize disturbance to parking, and is in high demand during the summer.

116 /// GAP Plan /

0

500

1,000 Ft


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

Existing Hominy Creek Greenway

B

COUNTY-LED

SECTION

Future Rhododendron Creek Greenway

CITY-LED S

ECTION

A closeup of the Shelburne Road area

BEFORE AND AFTER OF DECOMISSIONED BRIDGE

B

/

GAP Plan

/// 117


rk

a te

co

INVESTMENT LEVEL

$$$$$ Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Spine • Length: 6.6 miles (rail-with-trail) and 0.88 for the Deaverview Greenway • Description: Greenway proposed within Blue Ridge Southern Railroad right of way. This greenway scores high for addressing equity and connectivity needs. Also has a proposed connection to the Deaverview area. Public engagement with the Emma Community is essential to meeting equity issues in this area.

118 /// GAP Plan /

Kim be rly

W ea ve r Pa

E mm a Fr

e

y

Grw

re e k Bent C

st We

WE S T A SHE V I L L E R A IL -W ITH-TR AIL & D E AV ER V I E W CO N NECTOR

An example of a rail-with-trail in Blackstone River Bike Path in Rhode Island

40

d R i v er

0.5

rG

ve

T r a il

il k

y

ee

0

w el l G r w

Cr

i n an o a R

hB ro a

.

cD o

H om i ny

Cr

eM

Enk a H er i t a g e Trail

k

or

26

ENKA

S wa n

ree

wy Gr

eC

ch

t

40

l Rags d a

ny

B

es

le

h B r o ad R i v e r G r w y nc

ek

c en Fr

vil

th

an

an

a

Ho m i

A

e sh

rW

eC re

A m bo y R o a d S i d e p a

ni

City-led project

R

Nas t y B r

ve

Ca

Enka Heritage Trail/County-led greenway

WEST ASHEVILLE

Ri

West Asheville Greenway Rail-with-Trail Greenway & Deaverview Connector Status

ern Malv nway Gree

County-Planned Greenway

op

tm

Potential Other Greenway

240

W ilm a Dy k e m

B

Neighborhood Greenway

B ro a d

Rh o d dend Cree ron Conn k ector

Arterial Greenway

A

Bil

C

Existing Arterial Greenway

D o w n to

French

Deaver vi Greenw ew ay

DOWNTOWN

Ba

Greenway Spine

W est A sh C o n n e ev i l l ctor e

B

W

e

Ha C o z el nn M i ll ec to r S m i t h M i l l C ree k Co nn ec to r

Down Conn Loop

wn L o

A

lle

rd

ve r Ri

Soon To Be Constructed Spine

st

vi

M o n t fo

ad

D

Existing Spine

e sh

Trail

ch B r o en

Greenway Type

il Ra

Fr

6

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

1 Mile

r wy


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

ntown nector - East

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

A. Murphy Junction will be a challenging area where greenway, railroad, and Emma Road intersects. Crossing underneath the railroad needs to be studied further. B. Further analysis of all road and creek crossings are needed to ensure that the greenway can stay within railroad right of way. W KH

C. Deaverview Greenway connects into rail-with-trail at Roger D Farmer Park and Deaverview Road. Its western terminus is Deaverview Apartments. D. From Leicester Highway to Old Haywood Road the railroad right of way widens from 75-100 feet, allowing for significant buffering from the rail line. E. There is a challenging crossing area near the Lowe’s entrance off of Smokey Park Highway. See image to right.

EXISTING CONDITIONS ALONG THE RAIL LINE

See Appendix XX for a more detailed analysis of the railwith-trail.

E

IN

LL

I RA

Y

R PA Y E

OK

SM

Challenging crossing area near entrance of Lowes off of Smokey Park Highway, yellow dashed line indicated potential greenway alignment options

INTERSECTION WITH PINEY PARK RD

INTERSECTION WITH BEAR CREEK RD

INTERSECTION WITH JOHNSON BLVD

MURPHY JUNCTION (TWO RAILROAD LINES AND SMITH MILL CREEK INTERSECT)

/

GAP Plan

/// 119


look Rd Gree nwa y

7

Arden Grwy (Co ulian/ u n t y) eJ k La

e

Juli Grw an/Arde y (C n oun ty)

D E

ville

Greenway Spine

n

a Lake Juli

i-u u lt Rd M

Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway

enw ay

Soon To Be Constructed Spine

C

Neighborhood Greenway

th Pa

County-Planned Greenway

Hendersonville Road Multi-use Path & Jake Rusher Greenway Status

B

Buncombe County-led as part of County’s Lake Julian Park

0

City-led project

H E N D E RS O NV I L L E ROAD M ULTI-USE PAT H & JAK E R U S HER GR E E NWAY INVESTMENT LEVEL

$$$$$

Proposed Greenway

Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Arterial

Jake Rusher Park and Walking Path

• Length: 1 mile (City-led section) • Description: Greenways travels from Sweeten Creek, through Jake Rusher Park, and as a multi-use path along Hendersonville Road until it connects into the Lake Julian Greenway (County-led greenway).

120 /// GAP Plan /

A

se

Potential Other Greenway

The Jake Rusher Park existing walking path and proposed greenway

0.25

G re

Existing Spine

n erso nd He

Greenway Type

Jak e

Lak

y

eenwa

lian Gr

u Lake J

eville South Ash

Over

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

Rail Trail

S ch enc kP Gre kw y enw ay

n

he us R

r

0.5 Mile


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

A. Starting at Sweeten Creek Road, the greenway runs through Jake Rusher Park, which already has a walking loop around the park that could be partially expanded to accommodate a full-sized greenway. B. The crossing of Hendersonville Road will be a design challenge since there are no nearby signalized crossings. Options for improved crossing should be analyzed. C. A multi-use path can travel along Hendersonville Road as proposed in the Hendersonville Road Corridor Study, or a greenway can go behind businesses along the shore of Lake Julian. D. If paralleling the road, a greenway connection into the South Asheville Rail-with-Trail would require further study since there is opportunity to use the elevated bridge that is inactive (no longer being used by Duke’s Power Plant) in this spot to cross over Hendersonville Road. E. Connect into the proposed Lake Julian Greenway using the decommissioned rail line segment than runs from points D to E.

BEFORE AND AFTER AT JAKE RUSHER PARK

A

/

GAP Plan

/// 121


8

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

0

RH O D O D END RO N C REEK G R EENWAY

500

1,000 Ft

INVESTMENT LEVEL

E

E

PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Greenway Type: Arterial

Fa Rh Co odod nn ec endr tor on -

S PHA

Sa nd

Hi

ll

Rd

OND SEC

Feasibility study for northern section (see map), design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.

lco nh urs

t

$$$$$

• Length: 1 mile • Description: Rhododendron Creek is an important greenway connection for West Asheville, as it would connect much of the neighborhood to the river, French Broad River Greenway, the River Arts District, and west to the existing and proposed Hominy Creek.

D

Greenway Type

Greenway Spine

1

Existing Arterial Greenway

KEY ELEMENTS

Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway

ASE

ay

C

2 Hom

B

i ny

ee Cr

st

k

A re

G

122 /// GAP Plan /

e nw

City-led design/build project

We

E. The Second Phase of the greenway needs further refinement and easements.

Rhododendron Creek Greenway Status

ek Cre

D. The greenway would connect through West Asheville Park where it would also connect a proposed Neighborhood Greenway.

County-Planned Greenway

in y Hom

C. The First Phase of the greenway is currently being assessed by the City. A design-build option is being explored. The City is working on finalizing easements.

Potential Other Greenway

T PH

A. Improved pedestrian/bicycle crossing needed to connect major greenway intersection.

FIRS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

on Creek Gr e dendr R h odo

Existing Spine Soon To Be Constructed Spine

B. The City has assessed how existing City-owned property can accommodate the greenway.

WEST ASHEVILLE

en

w ay


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

N CO SE D E AS PH

E

DAVENPORT RD

MORRIS ST

West Asheville Park

D

TALMADGE CT

T

RS

FI

TALMADGE ST

E

ER

AS

PH

RN

BU

EL SH D

MORNINGSIDE DR

REST LN

WESTFO

Rhododendron Creek

B City-owned property

SHEL

BURN

E RD A

Hominy Creek Greenway

Study area for Rhododendron Creek Park, representing the area where a greenway route is being studied.

/

GAP Plan

/// 123


A.

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY

Fai rw a

B. C.

Bc

Br.

y

a . Rv. .B ilm Br W Fr.

wy Gr

F

Swe e

n

ten

Yorkshire Connector s. er nt Extn e C et re St loh Shi West t s Ea Rd ee b s Bu n Co

INVESTMENT LEVEL

$$$$$ Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.

ne

ct o

r

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

D

• Greenway Type: Spine • Length: 5.8 miles

D

E

Rock

le Oak ee n Gr

d

Hill R

ra

il

-S

ea T

• Description: This greenway is proposed to travel in Blue Ridge Southern Railroad’s existing right of way, which is wide in some areas. This line is also less active, making it a prime opportunity for a greenway.

40

y w Sou ay th

40

h Greenw ay ilo Sh

y wa en

Cre ek Gr e

s h eville Rail T rai l

R oa S OU T H A S HE V I L L E an S wa n R AIL - WI T H- T R A I L & SWEETEN CR E E K ROA D

r iv e

Oakley Grwy

Am. R. Fr R. r.

S. A

9

Ke n South Tunnel Road Greenway Rvrb n a Park no PROJECTS nna Swan a n a n oa Sw r Oa kle a Riv e r t ano e n e r an pson S t Sw om 0 0.5 1 Mile Th

t.

ty as Els. N Brd. Cnn.

in

s-t

o

Moun t a

C Hend

A. Greenway connects to Lake Julian Greenway to Jake Rusher Park Greenway.

Greenway Type Existing Spine Soon To Be Constructed Spine

se

Greenway Spine Existing Arterial Greenway

lle Ra il T

Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway

D. The Shiloh community has identified several bicycle/pedestrian improvements that could connect well into this greenway.

S. Ashevi

Road

Potential Other Greenway

Overlook

County-Planned Greenway Mountains-to-Sea Trail

E. Railroad right-of-way becomes a challenge in this area, requiring the greenway to transition to a multi-use path on Sweeten Creek Road.

Sweeten Creek multi-use Path; work with NCDOT

e Lak

South Asheville Rail-with-Trail; City-led project

A

Jul den /Ar ia n

ke al Ja eri

Ar t

Schn

.

Lake

r

e La k n n Be

S. Asheville Rail-with-Trail Sweeten Creed Road Greenway Status

S

F. The Swannanoa River Greenway Feasibility t pur Study proposed a new connection across Norfolk Southern’s rail line to Thompson Street in this area.

B

th Pa

C. A connection up to the Blue Parkway and the Mountains-to-Sea Trail should be coordinated with the National Park Service.

i-u Mult

B. Key roadway crossings can be enhanced to provide connections into the surrounding community.

124 /// GAP Plan /

y

Pkw

rai l

dge

Ri Blue

Rd ville erson

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

La

ke J Gr ulia wy n (Co /Ard un en ty)


ing

ive r

to

n

R

a

rl y . . R Bev s nan Hill Swan

ns

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

i ver

B

3

Blue R

idge

Pkwy

0

Artist’s rendering of South Asheville Rail-with-Trail at Mills Gap Road

C

Connection to the Blue Ridge Parkway and Mountains-to-Sea Trail

/

GAP Plan

/// 125


rwy

Emma G

m

Greenway Type Soon To Be Constructed Spine

F

Existing Arterial Greenway Arterial Greenway Neighborhood Greenway

ay

W

RIVER ARTS DISTRICT

d oa Br

Smith Mill Creek Greenway Status Ri

0.25

0.5 Mile

S MI T H M ILL C REEK G R EEN WAY

h d. Bartle tct tor Neighbr e r t s Conn

0

Riv er A

Smith Mill Creek Greenway

a Wilm

Smith Mill Greenway Connection (Unpaved Trail)

r ve

WEST ASHEVILLE

enw

iv e le R

ch

eek G Smith Mill Cr

ay

Gre

Ashe v il est

en

nw

Smit

. tr nc C rts rA

Fr

A

urst Falconh ay Greenw

n

tto

Pa

B

D C

Patton Ave

e

to r

240

ctor

onne

eek C

l Cr h Mil

re e

County-Planned Greenway

E

We st As he vi lle

Haze lM ill Co nn ec

Potential Other Greenway

Av

ve r

r East ive

Greenway Spine

Ri

y

rw

G rd

fo

nt

Mo

Br

Existing Spine

H ill

dR oa Br ch en d Fr oa

ail Trail st Asheville R We

Ric hm on d

nch Fre

10

Em

CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS a

El. Br. C.

INVESTMENT LEVEL

$$$$$

KEY ELEMENTS

*See Location on Map by Corresponding Letters

Feasibility study, design, ROW acquisition, and construction are next steps.

A. The greenway ties into Falconhurst Natural Area, and a trail that will need to be unpaved per easement restrictions.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

B. The greenway passes alongside the Armory and crosses near or at Patton Avenue.

• Greenway Type: Arterial • Length: 1.6 miles • Description: Smith Mill Creek Greenway is proposed to travel parallel to Patton Avenue behind commercial strips and along Smith Mill Creek. It then is proposed to cross Patton Avenue where it intersects with at the proposed I-26 Connector. It then travels along Smith Mill Creek down to the river, along land that is proposed NCDOT right of way.

126 /// GAP Plan /

C. The greenway travels behind commercial development on the south side of Patton Avenue. D. The greenway would cross at the proposed I-26 junction with Patton Avenue. E. The trail would travel along Smith Mill Creek and what will eventually be NCDOT right of way. F. The trail travels down to the French Broad River. A design challenge at Murphy Junction will need to be worked out in order to navigate Norfolk Southern’s elevated crossing, as well as the junction with Emma Road and the proposed West Asheville Rail-with-Trail.


CITY OF ASHEVILLE TOP 10 GREENWAY PROJECTS

p oo

wn Co nn nt o Dow

e

L or ct

Bac ot

PL AC EHO LD E R I MAG E Smith Mill Creek

Potential location Potential for Smith Smith Mill Creek for Greenway (shown in Greenway blue) blue) Smith Mill Creek

Smith Mill Creek Greenway Connector to Patton Bridge & Downtown Asheville

Smith Mill Creek Greenway

The Visualization of the Proposed I-26 Connector and how the Smith Mill Creek Greenway interrelates (visualization provided by NCDOT)

/

GAP Plan

/// 127


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


6

THE ADA TRANSITION PLAN (A) SUMMARY


Lack of sidewalks or sidewalk curb ramps means people in wheelchairs have to go in roads, where people driving have trouble seeing something they don’t expect.” - East Asheville Resident

130 /// GAP Plan /


6

T H E A DA TR ANSITION PLAN (A) SUMMARY The overall goal of the Transition Plan is to remove barriers in Asheville’s public rights-ofway so that pedestrians with disabilities can fully access all of the amenities that the City has to offer. The Transition Plan will result in a plan to upgrade the City’s existing public rights-of-way network. Given the length and technical nature of the evaluation and transition plan document, this chapter contains only a summary that highlights the purpose and next steps. Appendix XX contains the full Self Evaluation and Transition Plan.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. The ADA Transition Plan component of Close the GAP will result in a new Transition Plan for the City’s Public Rights-of-Way. Examples of public rights-of-way include public streets, sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking. The requirements for the Plan are as follows: • Identify physical obstacles (or barriers) that make it hard for people to travel and prioritize the areas that have the biggest impact. • Consider the methods to be used to make the facilities accessible. • Develop a schedule with benchmarks to remove barriers.

23

W H AT IS T H E A DA TR A N S ITIO N P L A N F O R T HE PU B L IC RIG H T S - O F- WAY ? Many people with disabilities in our City rely on our multimodal network as their primary, or only, way to get from place to place. According to the 2019 American Community Survey, 12.2% of Asheville's population has some type of disability. Other sources report a greater disability presence. It is the City's responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities can move about City streets and buildings without barriers.

Image 23 / A Person with a Vision Impairment Trying to Navigate the Public Right-of-Way. (Source: Janet Barlow)

/ GAP Plan /// 131


Quick Sheets #5:

What is the Difference Between the ADA Transition Plan and Pedestrian Plan?

SIMPLY: The ADA Plan is about UPGRADES to EXISTING pedestrian facilities and the Pedestrian Plan addresses where to construct NEW facilities. Both must be ADA compliant to provide access for all. What is included in the public rights-of-way? The public rights-of-way include all public streets, sidewalks, road crossings and pedestrian signals, greenways, bus stops, and on-street parking.

• Running grades (the slope in the same direction of travel) • Cross slopes (the slopes across the travel path) • Turning and maneuvering space (the space where a pedestrian turns directions of travel)

What is the difference between a standard ADA Transition Plan and this ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rightsof-Way?

• Horizontal gaps (gaps in the surface of travel, such as a gap or crack in the sidewalk)

This Transition Plan addresses accessibility within the public rights-of-way and does not include information on the City of Asheville’s programs, practices, or building facilities not related to public rights-of-way.

• Detectable Warning Surfaces (DWS) and locations (also known as truncated domes, DWS is a distinctive surface pattern of domes that are detectable by a cane or underfoot to alert people of their approach to street crossings or other intersections)

What does ADA compliant mean? All new or altered pedestrian facilities within the City’s public rights-of-way (such as sidewalks, greenways, crossings, curb ramps, traffic signals, parking and bus stops) must meet (to the maximum extent that is feasible) certain requirements that allow access for individuals with disabilities. The route that must be kept compliant is called the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR). ADA compliance means that minimum standards must be met for each dimension or element along the PAR: • Clear width and height (which is sometimes blocked by encroachments - or physical intrusions - can including items such as utility poles, traffic signs, street furniture)

132 /// GAP Plan /

• Vertical rises (obstructions that are typically bumps or lips, such as of a sidewalk panel)

• Traffic signal features (e.g., pedestrian signals and pushbuttons, audible messages and vibro-tactile features) • Parking and accessible route to parking spaces • Width and height of waiting and loading areas at transit stops


24

Image 24 / Examples of Public Right-of-Way Include Streets, Sidewalks, Crossings, Pedestrian Signals and Bus Stops, Among Others.

TH E A DA S E L F E VA L UAT ION Before developing a plan to remove accessibility obstacles, it is necessary to document those obstacles. This is done in an ADA Self Evaluation and is required under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and 28 CFR 35.105, to perform a selfevaluation of its current transportation infrastructure policies, practices, and programs. Self evaluation items include:

Review of Policies and Practices This self-evaluation will identify what City policies and practices impact accessibility and examine how the City of Asheville implements these policies. Policies and practices are the standards, guidance and steps that the City follows to guide decisions and projects; while often invisible to the public, they are critical to

how the public experiences the right-of-way. This step will identify obstacles or barriers in City of Asheville's policies and practices. The goal is to develop a plan to provide accessibility and allow for full participation of individuals with disabilities. The results of this review are detailed in Chapter 9 and Appendix XX.

Review Infrastructure Needs This self-evaluation examines the condition of the City of Asheville’s Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) and identifies the need for infrastructure improvements. This will include the sidewalks, curb ramps, pedestrian/bicycle trails, street crossings, traffic control signals, on-street parking and transit facilities that are located within the City of Asheville rights-ofway. Any barriers to accessibility identified in the selfevaluation and the remedy to the identified barrier are set out in this transition plan.

/

GAP Plan

/// 133


Methodology and Approach In the past, the most common practice for reviewing infrastructure for ADA Transition Plans and Self Evaluations across the United States has involved a detailed identification of pedestrian obstacles by creating a full inventory of every foot of sidewalk, every curb ramp, pedestrian signal, parking space and bus stop. This includes measuring every slope and dimension. This endeavor can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and can take multiple years to complete. It creates massive amounts of data that cities struggle to manage and many never use. On top of this, it is common for cities to determine through this process that nearly every corridor will need some sort of compliance upgrade; and, frequently, up to 90% of facilities have at least one element of noncompliance.

5 25

The City of Asheville, like most communities, has limited resources and competing demands for them. Because of this, the City worked with industry leaders, with input from FHWA staff, that have been conducting ADA Transition Plans for the Public Right of Way based on a “corridor approach”.

The Corridor Approach The City of Asheville used a corridor evaluation methodology under the assumption that nearly all of the facilities in the public right-of-way contain at least one non-compliant element with respect to standards for accessibility in the public right-ofway. It is the City’s intent to make all of its pedestrian infrastructure accessible by identifying the areas with the highest needs, the greatest use, and making those improvements in order of priority. The “corridor approach” is an effort to upgrade all pedestrian facilities in the public right of way by developing projects to address sections of public corridors such as greenways or streets with sidewalks in an organized fashion, based on the prioritization methodology described in Chapter 4. The corridors (sidewalks and greenway sections) are defined by roadway or greenway beginning and end points as shown in the project lists.

Image 25 / A Common Practice for Reviewing Infrastructure for ADA Compliance is a Detailed Inventory of Slope and Dimension of the Right-of-Way.

134 /// GAP Plan /


26

Image 26 / People with Disabilities Navigating Asheville’s Public Right-of-Way (Source: Janet Barlow).

Not all corridors are on the priority list; however all existing pedestrian facilities are in the ADA Transition plan. Additional details can be found in Appendix XX. As such, the plan and schedule to remove obstacles was developed methodically as follows: 1. Determine what corridors are most important to upgrade based on destination + equity, safety, connectivity, and public feedback. 2. Develop a schedule and plan with cost estimates to remove obstacles. 3. Upgrade corridors by order of priority including the following actions: Perform a detailed ADA assessment. Identify barriers and obstacles. Remove fully compliant elements from the Transition Plan. Upgrade any non-compliant elements in order to remove obstacles and barriers.

The benefits of this process are as follows: 1. Provides a methodical approach to upgrading key pedestrian corridors throughout the City based on a thorough prioritization process (including destination + equity, safety, connectivity and public input factor). 2. Includes input from community members with disabilities and considers needed corridor upgrades to remove barriers based on local needs. 3. Allows for methodical advanced planning for crossdepartment and interagency corridor projects in order to maximize implementation and ADA Transition Plan database updates. 4. Moves toward implementation faster (money and time for up front measurements can be spent on implementation). 5. Improves efficiency as conditions along roadways deteriorate and may be in a different condition by the time any work is done.

/

GAP Plan

/// 135


M O RE A BOU T T H E A DA The Americans with Disabilities Act, enacted on July 26, 1990, is a civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against individuals on the basis of disability. Title II of the ADA pertains to the programs, activities and services that public entities provide. As a provider of public transportation services and program, the City of Asheville must comply with this section of the Act as it specifically applies to public service agencies. Title II of the ADA provides that, “… no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” (42 USC. Sec. 12132; )

TH E A DA AND I T S REL ATIO N SH I P TO OT H E R L AW S Title II of the ADA is a companion legislation to two previous federal statutes and regulations: • The Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 is a Federal law that requires Federal facilities that are designed, built, altered or leased with Federal funds be accessible. The Architectural Barriers Act marks one of the first efforts to ensure access to the built environment.

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a Federal law that protects qualified individuals from discrimination based on their disability. The nondiscrimination requirements of the law apply to employers and organizations that receive financial assistance from any Federal department or agency. Title II of the ADA extended this coverage to all state and local government entities, regardless of whether they receive federal funding or not.

What are the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)? Even in 2022, the country is without established standards for accessibility in the public right-of-way. The United States Access Board is developing new guidelines under the Americans with Disabilities Act, called the PROWAG, that will address access to sidewalks and streets, crosswalks, curb ramps, pedestrian signals, on-street parking, and other components of public rights-of-way. These guidelines also review shared use paths, which are designed primarily for use by bicyclists and pedestrians for transportation and recreation purposes. The Access Board issued proposed guidelines for public comment. The Board is in the process of finalizing these guidelines. These guidelines are considered “best practice” until they are finalized and adopted by the Department of Justice, when they become the new standard.

27

Image 27 / Art Installation Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the ADA Law (Source: Tinkering Monkey)

136 /// GAP Plan /


EP T S

A DA TR A NS I T IO N P L A N PRO JECT D E V E LO P ME NT PRO CES S ADA Priority Corridors were developed as follows:

Corridor Prioritization: Round 1

Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 As described in Chapter 4, this corridor prioritization methodology scored streets in the City to determine the areas of greatest need based on the combination of three scores: destination + equity, safety and connectivity

Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) In order to account for public concerns and reported issues with the pedestrian network, corridors received points based on public input received during the initial Broad Community Feedback Surveys in January 2021 and the Project Network Survey in the Fall of 2021, as described in Chapter 3 and Appendix XX. Map 22 outlines how the team assigned points after a detailed review of both public surveys.

EP T S Corridor Prioritization: Round 2 (Public Feedback)

EP T S

Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category After the corridor scoring was completed, roadways that scored more than 10 points (maximum score of 20 points) were further divided into two priority project lists based on roadway maintenance and ownership. These categories were developed to assist with identifying project development, funding partnerships and coordination needs. North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Roadways • Priority ADA Project Groups 1- 9 (See Map 23 and Table 13 for project list details).

Final Project Lists by Category

EP T S Corridor Recommendations

City of Asheville (COA) Roadways • Priority ADA Project Groups 1-5 (See Map 24 and Table 14 for project list details)

EP T S Round 3 Public Feedback

/

GAP Plan

/// 137


28

29

Need to get a picture from the field.

Image 28 / Patton Avenue is one of the Highest Scoring ADA Projects for City Maintained Streets Image 29 / Tunnel Road, Near the VA is One of the Highest Scoring ADA Projects for NCDOT Maintained Streets

Step 4. Project Development & Recommendations After the public vetted the priority network, the team compiled project lists and evaluated each corridor to determine needed ADA and pedestrian improvements. From that review, each corridor received a project description and recommendations. The corridor evaluation and project development details are available in table format in Appendix XX. For projects that have a combination of ADA Transition Plan elements (e.g., existing sidewalks and ramps) and Pedestrian Plan elements (e.g., sidewalk gaps and new crossings), the project descriptions were combined. This will allow for development of a complete project as each corridor is advanced into implementation. Even if these improvements are phased (not completed at the same time or under one project), a completed corridor requires implementation of both missing connections as well as upgrading existing facilities in order to ensure accessibility for all users. The project information included in the tables in Appendix XX includes the following details on each corridor: • Funding and project development status • Recommended next steps for implementation • Prioritization next steps, where applicable

138 /// GAP Plan /

ADA Conditions Scan For each corridor, the team completed a desktop scan to identify existing condition information available through published maps, photos, local knowledge and geographic information system (GIS) databases. These reviews included an initial “high level” assessment that indicates the prevalence and severity of accessibility barriers within the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR). This rating database should be updated as corridors are upgraded and documented as ADA compliant, thus allowing their removal them from the ADA Transition Plan. The ratings are as follows: 1. Fully compliant. 2. Good condition: needs compliance review to verify. 3. Fair condition: needs ADA upgrades in spots (specific locations). 4. Moderate condition: needs many ADA upgrades.

ADA STANDARDS: Please visit to learn more: https://www.ada. gov/2010ADAstandards_index.htm


5. Poor condition: needs significant ADA upgrades (full sidewalk reconstruction for much of the corridor). Note that no corridors were assigned a rating of 1 (fully compliant) since corridor assessments have not been completed and all corridors remain on the Transition Plan. The rating system was used to determine cost estimates for the ADA Transition Plan (see Appendix XX tables XX – XX).

Checklist for ADA Assessment and Scoping Perform a detailed ADA assessment for scoping which will include identifying barriers and obstacles for repair and scoping. Review elements include: • Curb ramps and crossings • Sidewalk cracks and gaps • Sidewalk cross slopes • Vertical and horizontal encroachments in the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR must be kept clear per height and width requirements)

The City can use these ratings as a tool when deciding which corridors to program during regular cycles of capital project programming. For example, when a list of ADA projects is considered for an upcoming capital improvement cycle and one is a high priority corridor with a conditions rating of 2 (Good Condition), it may be shifted down on the project list to accommodate a slightly lower priority project with a conditions rating of 5 (Poor Condition).

• Accessible signals and push button placement • Excessive driveway openings • Audible crossing features at roundabouts & free flowing right turns • Accessible on-street parking needs • Transit stop accessibility

How to Implement the Corridor Approach Based on the ADA Transition Plan corridor approach, the team did not conduct a detailed inventory of non-compliant elements (e.g., absence of curb ramps) in the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR). As described previously, since each corridor is programmed for ADA upgrades, the City’s first task will be to perform a detailed ADA assessment and develop a project scope of work. See the checklist for ADA Assessment and Scoping below.

• Location-specific maintenance and policy needs (what is needed to keep pedestrian access route clear (e.g., future utility work, inadequate repairs, trash cans, vegetation) Post assessment, all elements that are fully ADA compliant may be removed from the ADA Transition Plan. These elements should be documented and maintained on a City database with corridor assessment results and transition plan progress.

30

31

Image 30 / Curb Ramp Elements (Source: Virginia Transportation Research Council) Image 31 / Watauga Street in Montford is an Example of a Sidewalk with an ADA Condition Rating of 5 - In Poor Condition.

/

GAP Plan

/// 139


Develop a budget and scope of work for updating all non-compliant elements for each corridor. The budget and scope of work process should be based on the Pre-Design Checklist, as detailed in Chapter 8.

1. Merrimon Avenue

Complete project planning, design and construction as detailed in Chapter 8.

5. Amboy Road

This is not an exhaustive list. All construction must meet the Federal 2010 ADA Standards which are available here and described in greater detail in the Appendix XX. Using the Proposed Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) is recommended as best practice as well.

Step 5. Public Input Round 3 The City collected a final round of public input in March 2022 which included an online survey and ADA Focus Group meetings. Additionally, the Think Tank Team, FBRMPO and the Citizens Advisory Committee met one final time which involved various City departments, NCDOT and Buncombe County representatives. More on ADA Focus Group Feedback and Priorities During Round 2 and Round 3 of public input for the Close the GAP Plan, the City hosted a series of virtual ADA Focus Group meetings. These small groups allowed for feedback on projects, priority corridors, as well as City policies that impact mobility for differently abled individuals moving about the City of Asheville. The dates of these focus groups were as follows: • September 14th, 2021 • September 16th, 2021 • March 31, 2022 Several one-on-one meetings took place as well. Attendees included individuals with ambulatory impairments, wheelchair users, those with vision impairments (full and partial) as well as support organizations that provide services for individuals with disabilities. Although a few specific corridors were cited during Focus Group meetings, much of the discussion centered around key maintenance and policy issues that result in obstacles along the Pedestrian Access Routes (PARs) in the City. Focus Group and survey participants mentioned several key corridors in need of ADA upgrades. The top mentioned corridors are as follows (in order of most mentioned):

140 /// GAP Plan /

2. Haywood Road 3. Broadway Street (north of I-240) 4. Tunnel Road 6. Fairview Road 7. Kenilworth Road Several corridors were mentioned frequently on the ADA survey that do not yet have full connections and therefore are part of the Pedestrian and Greenway plans, These corridors are as follows: 1. Leicester Highway – Pedestrian Plan 2. Swannanoa River Road – Pedestrian Plan 3. Johnston Boulevard 4. Sweeten Creek Road 5. Riverside Drive 6. Hominy Creek Road The ADA Focus Group feedback related to types of facilities that are desired as well as key maintenance and policy issues are summarized on the following two pages. More details and recommendations on these items are included in Chapter 9: Standards and Policy Recommendations.


Map 22. Public Input Score Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

/

GAP Plan

/// 141


Quick Sheets #6:

Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Facilities and Design Items

1

Provide pedestrian push buttons & audible pedestrian signals (most important in loud crowded areas)

2

Improve design for directional ramps (2 per corner vs. single corner ramp)

3

Correct steep driveway apron cross slopes and minimize driveway curb cuts

4

Provide adequate audible and directional queues for roundabout crossings

32

33

Image 32 / Audible Push Buttons that are Properly Positioned are Essential for Individuals with Disabilities to be able to Cross Busy Streets. (Source: https://twitter.com/ nyc_dot/status/1286339567067463684?lang=gu) Image 33 / Example of Preferred Curb Ramp Configuration for Individuals in Wheelchairs and with Vision Impairments. (Source: Colorado DOT “Curb Ramp Designers Resource” Version 1.3) Image 34 / Example of Steep Driveway Cross Slope on Tunnel Road. Anything Over 2% is Non-compliant and can be a Barrier for Travel. Image 35 / Roundabout Crossings are Challenging for Those with Vision Impairments; Treatments such as Signals and Flashing Beacons with Audible Messages can Help. (Source: https://carmanah.com)

142 /// GAP Plan /

34

35


Quick Sheets #7:

Top ADA Focus Group Priorities: Maintenance and Policy Items

1

Maintain accessible routes through temporary work zones

2

Remove permanent obstacles in sidewalks such as utility poles

3

Fix sidewalks in poor repair

4

Improve drainage at curb ramps to prevent water ponding and gravel build up

38

36

37

5 6

40

39

Enforce policies that keep temporary obstacles off the Pedestrian Access Route (PAR) such as trash can, signs, snow removal and vegetation overgrowth

Maintain vertical requirements for PAR for cane usage and to prevent injury

41 Image 36 / Example of Temporary Ramp used to Maintain Access through a Temporary Work Zone. (Source Oregon DOT) Image 37 / Example of Utility Poles and Other Obstacles in PAR Merrimon Avenue. Image 38 / Example of a Sidewalk in Poor Repair that Creates and Obstacle. Image 39 / Example of Curb Ramp on Charlotte Street in Need of Better Drainage. Image 40 / Signs in the Sidewalk Create an Obstacle on Merrimon Avenue. Image 41 / Vertical Clearance Requirements Ensure Visually Impaired Pedestrians can Navigate without Injury. (Source: https://www.access-board.gov/ada/ guides/chapter-3-protruding-objects/)

/

GAP Plan

/// 143


Map 23. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

144 /// GAP Plan /


Table 13. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 Map ID # 1.A 2.A 2.B 2.C 2.D 2.E 3.A 3.B 3.C 3.D 3.E 3.F 3.G 4.A 4.B 4.C 4.D 4.E 4.F 4.G 4.H 4.I 4.J 5.A 5.B 5.C 5.D 5.E 5.F

Segment

Total Score

Tunnel Rd. Biltmore Ave. Fairview Rd. (Alt US 74) Merrimon Ave. (US 25) Merrimon Ave. (US 25) Patton Ave. (US 19/23; Alt US 74) Tunnel Rd. Tunnel Rd. Tunnel Rd. Hendersonville Rd. (US 25)

New Haw Creek Rd. to Porters Cove Rd. Southside Ave. to Thompson St.

19 18

Swannanoa River Rd. to School Rd.

18

I-240 Interchange

18

Planned (MTP)

I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd.

18

Planned (MTP)

Rock Hill Rd to NC 280

17

Study Complete

Charlotte St.

I-240 Interchange

17

Planned (MTP) Fund Short Term ADA Upgrades

Sand Hill Rd. to Old Haywood Rd.

17

Road Name

Smokey Park Hwy. (US 19/23; Alt US 74) Patton Ave. (US 19/23; Alt US 74) Biltmore Ave. (US 25) McDowell St. (US 25) S. Charlotte St. Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Merrimon Ave. (US 25) Broadway St. Haywood Rd. Haywood Rd. Sweeten Creek Rd. (Alt US 25) Broadway St. S. Tunnel Rd. Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Long Shoals Rd. (NC 146) Long Shoals Rd. (NC 146) Airport Rd. (NC 280)

Johnston Blvd./Haywood Rd. to I-240 Interchange Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd. Tunnel Rd. to Chunns Cove Rd. I-240 Interchange

18 17 Grouped 17

Funding Status Planned (MTP) Study Complete

Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps) Study Complete Study Complete Study Complete

Old Haywood Rd. to Johnston Blvd./ Haywood Rd. Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave. Entire St. I-240 to Biltmore Ave.

17

Planned (MTP)

16 16 16

Study Complete

I-40 to Rock Hill Rd.

16

Planned (MTP)

I-40 Interchange

16

WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd.

16

Planned (MTP)

I-240 Interchange Sand Hill Rd. to Patton Ave. I-240 to Sand Hill Rd.

16 16 16

Planned (MTP) Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003)

Crayton Rd. to Rock Hill Rd.

16

Planned (MTP)

Patton Ave. to I-240 Entire St.

15 15

Study Complete

Biltmore Ave. to I-40

15

Hendersonville Rd. to Overlook Dr

15

Schenck Parkway to Overlook Dr

15

Watson Rd. to Hendersonville Rd.

15

Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining

/

GAP Plan

/// 145


Map 23. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 (continued) Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

146 /// GAP Plan /


Table 13. NCDOT: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 9 (continued) Map ID #

Road Name

5.G

Airport Rd. (NC 280)

5.H 5.I 6.A 6.B 6.C 6.D 6.E 6.F 7.A 7.B 8.A 8.B 8.C 8.D 8.E 8.F 8.G 9.A 9.B 9.C 9.D 9.E 9.F 9.G 9.H 9.I 9.J 9.K 9.L 9.M

Segment

Town of Fletcher Boundary WT Weaver Blvd. to I-26 Broadway St. Interchange Haywood Rd. Beverly Rd. west to I-240 I-240 to Stradley Mountain Rd./ Brevard Rd. (NC 191) Ridgefield Blvd. Biltmore Ave. (US 25) Southside Ave. to Hilliard Ave. New Haw Creek Rd. Arco Rd. to Beverly Rd. Merrimon Ave. (US Beaverdam Rd. to Wembley Rd. 25) Broadway St. I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd. Beverly Rd. west to Roberts St./ Haywood Rd. Clingman Ave. traffic circle Clingman Ave. Entire St. College St. & Tunnel Charlotte St. to Beaucatcher Tunnel Rd. Brevard Rd. (NC 191) I-240 to Haywood Rd. Sardis Rd. (NC 112) Country Meadows Dr. to Sand Hill Rd. Montford Ave. I-240 Interchange Louisiana Ave. Haywood Rd. to Patton Ave. Sand Hill Rd. Wendover Rd. to Haywood Rd. Hendersonville Rd. to Alpine Ridge Mills Gap Rd. Dr. Swannanoa River Rd. One Way to Bryson St. Amboy Rd. Bridge French Broad River Bridge Patton Ave. to north of Hazel Mill N. Louisiana Ave. Rd. Wood Ave. Swannanoa River Rd. to Future St. All Souls Crescent McDowell St. to Hendersonville Rd. (US 25) Brooke & Lodge St. Entire St. Thompson St. to Hendersonville Rd. Biltmore Ave. US 25 Overlook Dr NC 146 to Springside Rd. Rosscraggon Rd. & Entire St. Rathfarnham Rd. Beaverdam Rd. Merrimon Ave. to Kimberly Ave. Amboy Rd. Entire St. Sand Hill Rd. (NC 112) Lake Dr. to Sardis Rd. Southside Ave. (US Entire St. 25) Biltmore Ave. to Swannanoa River Bryson St. (US 81) Rd.

Total Score

Funding Status

15

Planned (MTP)

15

Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)

15

Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003)

14 14 14 14

Planned (MTP)

14

Planned (MTP)

14 13 13 12 12 12 12 12

Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)

12

Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)

12 11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-6162)

11 11

Study Complete

11

Study Complete

11

Study Complete

11 11 11 11 11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

11 11

Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)

/

GAP Plan

/// 147


Map 24. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

148 /// GAP Plan /


Table 14. COA: Priority ADA Project Groups 1 - 5 Map ID #

Road Name

1.A

Patton Ave.

2.A 2.B 3.A

Lexington Ave. Haywood St. Hilliard Ave.

3.B

Asheland Ave.

3.C 3.D 4.A 4.B

Asheland Ave. Valley St. Church St. Battery Park Ave. Woodfin & Oak Streets College St. Livingston St. Hospital Dr. Lakeshore Dr. Montford Ave. Chestnut St. Kenilworth Rd. Fairview Rd. College St. Shiloh Rd. Battle Square Walnut St. Coxe Ave. Wall St. O'Henry Ave. Otis St. N French Broad Ave. S French Broad Ave.

4.C 4.D 4.E 4.F 4.G 4.H 4.I 4.J 4.K 4.L 5.A 5.B 5.C 5.D 5.E 5.F 5.G 5.H 5.I 5.J 5.K 5.L 5.M 5.N 5.O 5.P 5.Q 5.R 5.S 5.T

Segment Clingman Ave./Haywood St. to Biltmore Ave.

Total Score 18

Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Hilliard Ave. to Phifer St./Southside Ave. Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave. College St. to Hazzard St. Entire St. Entire St.

15 15 14

Entire St.

13

Patton Ave. to Spruce St. Entire St. Entire St. Shorewood Dr. to Merrimon Ave. Entire St. Merrimon Ave. to Broadway St. Tunnel Rd. to Pickwick Rd. Sweeten Creek Rd. to School Rd. Charlotte St. to Spruce St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Entire St. Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave. Lyman St./Clingman Ave. Ext north to Roberts St. traffic circle Livingston St. to Lyman St./ Depot St. Clingman Ave. Ext Victoria Rd. Hospital Dr. to Fernihurst Dr. Victoria Rd. Fernihurst Dr. to Meadow Rd. S French Broad Ave. Hilliard Ave. to Livingston St. Riverside Dr. I-240 to I-26 Ramp State St. Entire St. Murdock Ave. Entire St. Hill St. Montford Ave. to Atkinson St. Wood Ave. & Cedar St. Wood Ave. and Cedar St. Short McDowell St. Meadow Rd. to McDowell St.

Funding Status Planned Repaving Project (Includes ADA) Planned Protected Bike Lane Project (College St. to Biltmore Ave.) Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)

14 14 14 12 12

12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)

11 11

Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)

11 11 11 12 11 11 11 11 11

/

GAP Plan

/// 149


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


7

THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN (P) RESULTS


It’s the neighborhood and the people that make the walk enjoyable.” - Downtown Resident


7

THE PEDESTRIAN PLAN (P) R E S U LT S

Step 2: Corridor Prioritization - Round 2 (Public Feedback) In order to account for public concerns and reported issues with the pedestrian network, corridors received points based on public input received during the initial Broad Community Feedback Surveys in January 2021 and the Project Network Survey in the Fall of 2021, as described in Chapter 3 and Appendix XX. Map 25 outlines how the team assigned points after a detailed review of both public surveys.

The Pedestrian Plan is a guiding document that provides a clear and transparent path to extending new pedestrian facilities that will create a safe, cohesive and connected system for users of abilities.

PRO JECT I D E NT I FIC AT IO N The Close the GAP Pedestrian Plan goal is to identify top priorities for the following: 1. New sidewalks and sidewalk improvements, such as widening or better separation from traffic. 2. Intersection and mid-block pedestrian crossing improvements.

Image 42 / The City Maintains Most Streets in Downtown Asheville like Haywood Street and Battery Park Avenue.

42

One of the most important purposes of this effort is to provide guidance for City officials and local stakeholders as they make decisions on where to fund construction of new facilities. This plan developed this guidance through the following steps:

Step 1: Corridor Prioritization - Round 1 As described in Chapter 4, this corridor prioritization methodology scored streets in the City to determine the areas of greatest need based on the combination of three scores: destination + equity, connectivity and safety.

/ GAP Plan /// 153


EP T S

Step 3: Final Project Lists by Category

Corridor Prioritization: Round 1

After the corridor scoring was completed, roadways that scored greater than 10 points out of 20 maximum points were further divided into two priority project lists based on roadway maintenance and ownership. These categories were developed to assist with identifying project development and funding partnerships and coordination needs. North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)

S

TEP

• Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1- 9 (See Map 26 and Table 15 for project list details). City of Asheville (COA) Roadways

Corridor Prioritization: Round 2 (Public Feedback)

• Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1-5 (See Map 27 and Table 16 for project list details)

Step 4: Project Development & Recommendations

S

TEP Final Project Lists by Category

S

TEP

After the public vetted the priority network, the team compiled project lists and evaluated each corridor to determine needed ADA and pedestrian improvements. From that review, each corridor received a project description and recommendations. Examples of the pedestrian plan recommendations that were considered are as follows: • Complete missing sidewalk sections • Provide connections to transit stops • Improve safety at pedestrian crossings • Increase frequency of pedestrian crossings • Widen sidewalks and/or provide separation from traffic

Corridor Recommendations

EP T S Round 3 Public Feedback

154 /// GAP Plan /

• Multi-use sidepaths were included in some instances where the corridor is part of a planned bicycle route or has previously identified bicycle needs. This is not an exhaustive list of pedestrian facility design needs. For more information, see More on Pedestrian Facility Section at the end of this chapter. Projects with ADA Transition Plan elements (e.g., existing sidewalks and ramps) and Pedestrian Plan elements (e.g., sidewalk gaps and new crossings) have combined project descriptions, which allows City staff to design a complete project as each corridor is advanced into implementation. Completing a pedestrian corridor requires the City to develop


43

44

Image 43 / A Pedestrian Crossing at a Location with a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) (Source: Texas Transportation Institute) Image 44 / Some of Asheville’s Busiest Corridors, like Tunnel Road, have a Myriad of Overlapping Land Use, Safety and Transportation Needs that Require a Detailed Study.

missing connections identified in the Pedestrian Plan, as well as upgrading existing facilities identified in the ADA Transition Plan. The City has the option to complete corridors under one project or using a phased approach. In addition to the corridor assessment and recommended improvements, a project database was developed for tracking progress, funding and next steps. Some projects are already in process. As such, the database contains the following information.: • Funding and project development status • Recommended next step for implementation • Prioritization of next steps, where applicable The final recommendations were vetted through NCDOT and various City departments to evaluate overlapping capital needs that could impact the timeline and prioritization for the project.

Step 5: Public Input Round 3 A final round of public input was conducted in March of 2022 which included an online survey, ADA focus group meetings, a Citizens Advisory Committee meeting as well as a project Think Tank Team meeting involving various City departments, FBRMPO, NCDOT and Buncombe County representatives.

/

GAP Plan

/// 155


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing

156 /// GAP Plan /


Map 25. 2. Example Public Input Score Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

157 /// GAP Plan /

/

GAP Plan

/// 157


Map 26. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

158 /// GAP Plan /


Table 15. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

1.A

Leicester Hwy.

Patton Ave. to Old County Home Rd.

19

Funded (NCDOT# U-5190) Note: Overlapping Access Management Project (NCDOT# U-5972)

1.B

Tunnel Rd.

New Haw Creek Rd. to Porters Cove Rd.

19

Planned (MTP)

2.A

Patton Ave.

Johnston Blvd./Haywood Rd. to I-240 Interchange

18

Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)

2.B

Merrimon Ave.

I-240 to WT. Weaver Blvd.

18

Planned (MTP)

2.C

Merrimon Ave.

WT Weaver Blvd. to Beaverdam Rd.

Grouped

Planned (MTP)

2.D

Fairview Rd.

Swannanoa River Rd. to School Rd.

18

3.A

Sweeten Creek Rd.

NC 280 to City Limit

17

Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)

3.B

Sweeten Creek Rd.

Just south of Edgewood Rd. Ext to Blue Ridge Parkway

17

Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)

3.C

Patton Ave.

Old Haywood Rd. to Johnston Blvd./Haywood Rd.

17

Planned (MTP)

3.D

Smokey Park Hwy.

Sand Hill Rd. to Old Haywood Rd.

17

3.E

Hendersonville Rd.

Rock Hill Rd. to NC 280

17

Study Complete

3.F

Tunnel Rd.

Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd.

17

Study Complete

4.A

Sweeten Creek Rd.

Crayton Rd. to Rock Hill Rd.

16

Planned (MTP)

4.B

Hendersonville Rd.

I-40 Interchange

16

4.C

Hendersonville Rd.

I-40 to Rock Hill Rd.

16

Planned (MTP)

4.D

Tunnel Rd.

Tunnel Rd. to Chunns Cove Rd.

16

Study Complete

4.E

McDowell St.

Entire St.

16

Study Complete

5.A

Swannanoa River Rd. Bryson St. to Highway 70

15

Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)

5.B

Sweeten Creek Rd.

Brook St. to Crayton Rd.

15

Planned (MTP)

5.C

Broadway St.

WT Weaver Blvd. to I-26 Interchange

15

Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL0005)

5.D

Airport Rd.

Watson Rd. to I-26 Ramps

15

Planned (MTP)

5.E

Airport Rd.

Watson Rd. to Hendersonville Rd.

15

Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining

5.F

Hendersonville Rd.

Biltmore Ave. to I-40

15

5.G

S. Tunnel Rd.

Entire St.

15

Study Complete

6.A

Meadow Rd.

Entire St.

14

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

6.B

Sand Hill Rd.

Smoky Park Hwy. to Lake Dr.

14

Funded (NCDOT# U-6037)

6.C

Broadway St.

I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd.

14

Planned (MTP)

6.D

Merrimon Ave.

Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd

14

Planned (MTP)

6.E

Brevard Rd.

I-240 to Stradley Mountain Rd./ Ridgefield Blvd.

14

/

GAP Plan

/// 159


Map 26. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 9 (continued) Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

160 /// GAP Plan /


Table 15. NCDOT: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 -9 (continued) Map ID #

Road Name

7.F

College St. & Tunnel Rd.

Charlotte St. to Beaucatcher Tunnel

13

7.G

Riverside Dr.

I-26 Ramp to Broadway St.

13

7.H

New Haw Creek Rd.

Tunnel Rd. to Arco Rd.

13

7.I

Chunns Cove Rd. & Piney Mountain Rd.

Tunnel Rd. to Bella Vista Retirement

13

7.J

Johnston Blvd.

Patton Ave. to Cedar Hill Rd.

13

8.A

Swannanoa River Rd. One Way to Bryson St.

8.B

Mills Gap Rd.

8.C

Old County Home Rd. Entire St.

12

8.D

Broadway St.

I-26 Interchange

12

Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)

8.E

Sardis Rd.

Country Meadows Dr. to Sand Hill Rd.

12

Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)

8.F

Brevard Rd.

I-240 to Haywood Rd.

12

9.A

Southside Ave.

Entire St.

11

9.B

Sand Hill Rd.

Sardis Rd. to Sand Hill School Rd./ W. Oakview Rd.

11

9.C

Sand Hill Rd.

Sand Hill School Rd./W. Oakview Rd. to Wendover Rd.

11

9.D

Sand Hill School Rd.

Entire St.

11

9.E

Amboy Rd.

Entire St.

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

9.F

Airport Rd .

Ferncliff Park Dr. to Airport Park Rd.

11

Planned (MTP)

9.G

Rosscraggon Rd. & Rathfarnham Rd.

Entire St.

11

9.H

Overlook Dr.

Springside Rd. to Hendersonville Rd.

11

9.I

Rock Hill Rd.

Entire St.

11

Planned (MTP)

9.J

Biltmore Ave.

Thompson St. to Hendersonville Rd. US 25

11

Study Complete

9.K

All Souls Crescent

McDowell St. to Hendersonville Rd.

11

Study Complete

9.L

Amboy Rd. Bridge

French Broad River Bridge

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

Segment

Hendersonville Rd. to Alpine Ridge Dr.

Total Score

Funding Status

Funded (NCDOT# I-2513D)

Funded (NCDOT# EB-5944)

12 12

Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)

/

GAP Plan

/// 161


Map 27. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 5 Source: Close the GAP Team Analysis

162 /// GAP Plan /


Table 16. COA: Priority Pedestrian Project Groups 1 - 5 Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)

1.A

Lexington Ave.

Entire St.

15

2.A

Hilliard Ave.

Entire St.

14

2.B

Deaverview Rd.

Pisgah View Rd. to Patton Ave.

14

3.A

Church St.

Entire St.

12

3.B

Livingston St.

Entire St.

12

3.C

N. Bear Creek Rd.

Entire St.

12

3.D

Montford Ave.

Entire St.

12

3.E

London Rd.

Entire St.

12

3.F

Caribou Rd.

Entire St.

12

3.G

West Chapel Rd.

Entire St.

12

3.H

Kenilworth Rd.

Tunnel Rd. to Pickwick Rd.

12

3.I

Fairview Rd.

Sweeten Creek Rd. to School Rd.

12

3.J

Emma Rd.

Craven St./Hazel Mill Rd. to Bingham Rd.

12

4.A

Shiloh Rd.

Entire St.

11

4.B

Coxe Ave.

Entire St.

11

4.C

Roberts St.

Lyman St./Clingman Ave. ext north to traffic circle

11

4.D

Depot St.

Livingston St. to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave. Ext

11

4.E

Victoria Rd.

Hospital Dr. to Fernihurst Dr.

11

4.F

Victoria Rd.

Fernihurst Dr. to Meadow Rd.

11

4.G

Lakeshore Dr.

Elkwood Ave. to Shorewood Dr.

11

4.H

Murdock Ave.

Entire St.

11

4.I

Hill St.

Montford Ave. to Atkinson St.

11

4.J

Springside Rd.

Entire St.

11

4.K

Wood Ave. and Cedar St.

Wood Ave. and Cedar St.

11

4.L

Short McDowell St.

Meadow Rd. to McDowell St.

11

5.G

Otis St.

Entire St.

11

5.H

N French Broad Ave.

Entire St.

11

5.I

S French Broad Ave.

Patton Ave. to Hilliard Ave.

11

5.J

Roberts St.

Lyman St./Clingman Ave. ext north to traffic circle

11

Funded (NCDOT# EB-5965)

Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)

Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)

/

GAP Plan

/// 163


M O RE O N P E D E S T R I A N FACIL IT Y SE L EC T IO N The focus of this section is to provide resources and guidance to consider during the planning and design phase of the Close the GAP pedestrian projects. The pedestrian component of a street design is one of many components that should be balanced when developing a complete street, where all users can move safety and efficiently.

Competing Needs and Complete Streets Resources The following graphic indicates the many components a community must balance when evaluating a complete street cross section for an urban street similar to many streets in Asheville.

This balancing act can be most challenging when project managers are considering design modifications along existing corridors in urban contexts with limited rights-of-way, like Tunnel or Hendersonville Roads. Given the many competing elements along each street, within the public rightof-way, the process for selection of the final cross section of a street is nuanced and should be based on planning and engineering studies that consider land use, traffic context and user demands, as well as safety and comfort needs. A concept that emphasizes this point is that of 8-80 cities1: building cities that are great for an 8-yearold and an 80-year-old. If streets are comfortable for these baseline age groups, then they should be accessible, low stress and comfortable for all user types.

Figure 22. Components of Complete Streets (Source: Philadelphia Complete Streets Design Handbook).

164 /// GAP Plan /


Resources for Complete Streets

USDOT ON COMPLETE STREETS Complete Streets are streets designed and operated to enable safe use and support mobility for all users. Those include people of all ages and abilities, regardless of whether they are traveling as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, or public transportation riders. The concept of Complete Streets encompasses many approaches to planning, designing, and operating roadways and rights of way with all users in mind to make the transportation network safer and more efficient. Complete Streets policies are set at the state, regional, and local levels and are frequently supported by roadway design guidelines. Complete Streets approaches vary based on community context. They may address a wide range of elements, such as sidewalks, bicycle lanes, bus lanes, public transportation stops, crossing opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian signals, curb extensions, modified vehicle travel lanes, streetscape, and landscape treatments. Complete Streets reduce motor vehicle-related crashes and pedestrian risk, as well as bicyclist risk when well-designed bicycle-specific infrastructure is included (Reynolds, 2009). They can promote walking and bicycling by providing safer places to achieve physical activity through transportation. One study found that 43% of people reporting a place to walk were significantly more likely to meet current recommendations for regular physical activity than were those reporting no place to walk (Powell, Martin, Chowdhury, 2003).

There are many resources existing for planners and designers to reference when selecting pedestrian facilities. . Three comprehensive complete street resources include: • Complete Streets - Institute of Transportation Engineers (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/ topics/complete-streets/) • National Complete Streets Coalition (https:// smartgrowthamerica.org/program/nationalcomplete-streets-coalition/) • Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center (PBIC) (https://www.pedbikeinfo.org/topics/ completestreets.cfm) In early 2022, NCDOT’s Integrated Mobility Division (IMD) introduced its new Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology (PEM). which provides planners and designers with additional guidance on facility selection and balancing needs within the public right-of-way. IMD’s new PEM is directed toward facility selection during NCDOT project development. Ideally, it will help the City define project feasibility and cost trade-offs for various complete streets needs developed in partnership with NCDOT. However, PEM is not only useful when NCDOT is upgrading roadways within the City. It will also provide useful tools for the City to consider when updating the Unified Development Ordinance and Standard Specifications and Details Manual, as is discussed in Chapter 9.

Source: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/ health/complete-streets#:~:text=Complete%20 Streets%20are%20streets%20 designed,bicyclists%2C%20or%20public%20 transportation%20riders.

/

GAP Plan

/// 165


Quick Sheets #8:

Key Elements of NCDOT Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology

NCDOT’s new Project Evaluation Methodology (PEM) aids in the evaluation of complete street projects using a five stage process: 1. Initial Screening and Data Input 2. Transportation Need Determination 3. Facility Type Selection 4. Impact Assessment 5. Final Analysis. Figure 23 was developed by NCDOT and displays the five-stage planning process.

TO LEARN MORE: Please visit: https://connect.ncdot.gov/ projects/BikePed/Documents/Complete%20 Streets%20Evaluation%20Methodology.pdf

Figure 24 was developed by NCDOT to provide facility selection guidance to planners and designers to use based on the amount of traffic along and the configuration of a street.

Figure 23. Complete Streets Project Evaluation Methodology Process (Source: NCDOT Complete Streets Evaluation Methodology).

166 /// GAP Plan /


Figure 24. Facility Selection Matrix (Source: NCDOT)

Facility Selection Legend and Notes

AADT and Roadway Configuration Operating Speed

Operating speed of 35 mph or less <6,000 AADT (2 or 3 Lanes) P: Wide Sidewalk (2) O: Sidewalk (2)

Pedestrian and Bicycle Demand

High

B: Buffered Bicycle Lane O: Bicycle Lane, Shared Lane

Any cross section with designs supporting speeds above 35 mph ≥6,000 AADT (2 or 3 Lanes)

4 Lane Divided

>4 Lanes

P: Wide Sidewalk (2) O: Sidewalk (2) B: SBL/SUP O: Buffered Bicycle Lane, Bicycle Lane

P: Sidewalk (1-2)

Medium

Low

B: Buffered Bicycle Lane O: Bicycle Lane, Shared Lane

B: SBL/SUP O: Buffered Bicycle Lane, Bicycle Lane

B - Denotes priority bicycle facility or space to accommodate bicyclists. The priority bicycle selection must be analyzed first before consideration of additional facility type options. O - Denotes alternative facility options for consideration in order of recommended evaluation after the priority facility. Options that provide the greatest separation from motor vehicles must be evaluated before other options. Terms: SBL = Separated Bicycle Lane, SUP = Shared-Use Path, “Shared Lane” may consist of Shared Lane Markings, additional markings, and traffic control devices for bicycle awareness, “Sidewalk+” indicates that presence of sidewalk and expanded buffer/furnishing strips, “Paved Shoulder” may accommodate bicyclists with widths that are to be determined, and “Shared Roadways” may include signage and shoulders per 3R guidance. (#) - Indicates number of sidewalks along a roadway. * - Sidewalk placement dependent on distribution of development along the roadway. For balanced development, consider sidewalks on both sides. Where land development is not consistent along both sides of the roadway and there is potential for pedestrian and /or bicycle crossing, consider including sidewalks on both sides of the roadway. Dual Priority Facility Types: When two priority facility types are shown for a mode, such as separated bicycle lanes and shared-use path (SBL/SUP), the Project Lead and Manager should review local plans, the roadway and bicycle and pedestrian network, and on-site conditions to select the more appropriate facility. Demand for Both Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities: In situations where demand is present of anticipated for both pedestrian and bicyclists, follow the facility selection table to accommodate both user types.

P: Sidewalk (1) O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD), No Facility/Shared Roadway B: Paved Shoulder (width TBD) O: Shared Roadway/ No Facility

Intermittent / None

P: Sidewalk + Expanded Buffer (1-2)* O: Sidewalk (1-2)*

P - Denotes priority pedestrian facility. The priority pedestrian facility must be analyzed first before consideration of additional facility type options.

P: Sidewalk (1) O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD)

P: Sidewalk (1) O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD)

B: Paved Shoulder (width TBD) O: Shared Roadway/ No Facility

B: SUP O: Paved Shoulder (width TBD), Shared Roadway/No Facility

B: Shared Roadway / No Facility

Cross Sections: Select the roadway configuration column with the same or higher number of lanes and median presence. Atypical cross sections (i.e. four-lane undivided, imbalanced lane configurations) are not shown above. Speed: Vehicle operating speed is an overall consideration for selecting facility types for pedestrians and bicyclists. High vehicle speeds increase the likelihood of a fatal or severe injury in the event of a pedestrian crash. If the operating speed is expected to be above 35 mph, then separated pedestrian and bicycle facilities are a priority of reducing the risk of severe injury and fatal bicycle an pedestrian crashes. The roadway project should include a network that supports the needs of the design user (considering the most likely type of bicyclist and abilities of the pedestrian population). The roadway should also include design features and measures to help achieve the desired operating speed, based on the surrounding context. If the operation speed exceeds the listed AADT and cross section, select the higher AADT lane configuration. Shoulders: Paved shoulders are neither a pedestrian nor bicycle facility, and the Project Lead and Manager should consult with the LGA and review for safety needs when considering this option. Paved shoulders are typical improvements on NCDOT projects, and Project Leads and Managers should consult the NCDOT Roadway Design Manual for standard widths.

Another tool developed with NCDOT’s PEM is the interactive user demand estimation tool. The image on the left shows the Balance Demand Scenario Scores for the Asheville area.

TO VIEW THE TOOL: Please visit: https://www.arcgis. com/apps/webappviewer/index. html?id=4d99643ea1354c0e9e8ad27243983bc4

/

GAP Plan

/// 167


ROA DWAY C RO S S I NG TREATM ENT S E L EC T IO N To create a truly accessible community for all transportation modes, facilities must be designed to maximize comfort, convenience and safety – not only along corridors but at locations where people walking interact with streets crossings, trails and driveways (access points). As discussed in the introduction of this Plan, people walking are disproportionally impacted by traffic crashes2. Potential exposure to people walking is introduced at intersections and crossings where these movements cross the path of motor vehicles. This is evident across the state of North Carolina where over the last 10 years, crossing related crashes accounted for 41% of on-roadway crashes involving people walking.3

More information can be found here: https://connect. ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/TEPPL%20 All%20Documents%20Library/Pedestrian_Crossing_ Guidance.pdf FHWA’s Proven Safety Countermeasures Initiative (PSCi) The USDOT Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has a Proven Safety Countermeasures Initiative (PSCi), which is the culmination of almost 15 years of safety work and now includes a comprehensive tool that can be used by transportation practitioners. This online tool can be used to address a variety of areas that impact pedestrian crossing safety including: • Speed management and speed limit setting guidance. • Crosswalk visibility enhancements and lighting

At the state and national level, many advances have been made in developing guidance and standards for pedestrian safety. The following resources represent best practices and should be carefully followed in the planning and design of pedestrian facilities for the Close the GAP pedestrian corridors.

• Leading pedestrian intervals

Guides for Improvement Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations

• Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs)

North Carolina Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018) The North Carolina Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018) provides guidance on when to consider marking crosswalks at uncontrolled approaches for pedestrians, when to install pedestrian signal heads at existing signalized intersections and when to providing supplemental treatments at a crossing location. The report includes a crosswalk assessment flowchart and is provided in a poster format that fully describes most aspects of the evaluation and decision-making process. The guidelines principally consist of four parts: Step 1) Document Existing Characteristics / Signalized Crossing Assessment Step 2) Unsignalized Crossing or Midblock Crossing Assessment Step 3) Additional / Alternative Treatments Assessment Step 4) Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) Assessment

168 /// GAP Plan /

• Road diets • Medians and pedestrian refuge islands • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs)

More information can be found here: https://safety. fhwa.dot.gov/provencountermeasures/ FHWA Toolbox of Pedestrian Countermeasures and Their Potential Effectiveness FHWA also issued a brief 8-page document in September 2018 that provides an extensive list of proven pedestrian countermeasures and reports on the anticipated “crash reduction that might be expected if a specific countermeasure or group of countermeasures is implemented with respect to pedestrian crashes”. More information can be found here: https://safety. fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/tools_solve/fhwasa18041/ fhwasa18041.pdf


FHWA’s Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian (STEP) Guide Nationally, locations where there is no traffic control (i.e., no traffic signal or stop sign to stop traffic) correspond to higher crash rates. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) released the “Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations” that provides crossing guidance for uncontrolled crossings to help local and state agencies “address significant national safety problems and improve quality of life for pedestrians of all ages and abilities”.4

Figure 25. Steps Involved for Selecting Counter-measures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations (Sources: STEP Guide)

The FHWA guide includes a process for evaluating crossings and determining appropriate countermeasures for specific crossing conditions based on engineering which includes data collection, site condition analysis and crash history review. These countermeasures range in cost and applicability based on roadway type and conditions. The guide process includes the analysis and countermeasure selection steps, illustrated in Figure 25. The STEP Guide includes a process for evaluating crossings and determining appropriate countermeasures for specific crossing conditions based on engineering which includes data collection, site condition analysis and crash history review. These countermeasures range in cost and applicability based on roadway type and conditions. Within the STEP Guide, seven lower-cost countermeasures (called “The Spectacular Seven”) are recommended to address significant national safety issues. These seven countermeasures are depicted in renderings and descriptions in Table 17, along with the corresponding reduction in crashes involving a person walking that is associated with each treatment.

/

GAP Plan

/// 169


Table 17. Seven Key Solutions to Improve Pedestrian Safety at Intersections (Source: STEP Guide). COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Key Elements: o High-visibility crosswalks o Pedestrian crossing warning sign (MUTCD W11-2) o Parking restrictions o Lighting o Other treatments may be considered (e.g., curb extension)

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

23-48%

COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Raised Crosswalks

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Function as an extension of the sidewalk and allow a person walking to cross the street at a constant grade.

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

45%

COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Pedestrian Refuge Islands

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Typically constructed in the middle of a 2-way street to provide a place for people on foot to wait for people driving to stop or yield.

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

32%

COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB)

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Unlike a traffic signal, the PHB rests in dark until a person walking activates it at which time the beacon displays a sequence of flashing and solid lights that control vehicular traffic while the pedestrian signal heads indicate when the pedestrian can walk.

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

55%

170 /// GAP Plan /


COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Road Diet

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

A reconfiguration of the roadway that is appropriate for an undivided road with wide travel lanes or multiple lanes that can be narrowed or repurposed to improve crossing safety for people walking.

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

19-47%

COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

A pedestrian actuated conspicuity enhancement used in combination with a pedestrian crossing warning sign to improve safety at uncontrolled, marked crosswalks.

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

47%

COUNTERMEASURE NAME

Leading Pedestrian Interval

BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Typically, a 3-7 second head start before vehicles are given a green signal.

REDUCTION IN CRASHES INVOLVING A PERSON WALKING

59%

To assist practitioners, the FHWA guide offers a matrix tool to determine appropriate crossing treatments that should be considered at an uncontrolled crossing based on posted speeds, annual average daily traffic (AADT) and the number of lanes a person walking must cross with or without a median or refuge island. These treatments should be based on an engineering judgement. In addition, it is important to note that the matrix provides a toolbox for treatments rather than mandated or required treatments. For midblock and uncontrolled crosswalks, the STEP Guide advises the following best practices and planning considerations:

• Consider how far the person walking needs to travel in distance and time (shorter distance and time is most successful) • Follow currently used travel routes • Connect key destinations • Maximize low-risk crossing locations • Avoid busy intersections and higher conflict areas if feasible In addition to the STEP Guide, there are also several design related guides and standards that address

/

GAP Plan

/// 171


crossing design for pedestrian facilities at traffic signals, unsignalized intersections and mid-block (non-intersection) locations. One such resource is the NCDOT Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018). These resources are detailed in the Implementation Plan section of this document.

PRO JECT E L E ME NT S F O R PEO PL E WA L K I NG The work of pedestrian system planning also includes the finer details such as traffic calming, access to transit and ADA accessibility. This section focuses on the finer, yet necessary, details that ensure that the pedestrian network is functional for all.

Traffic Calming As traffic congestion and travel speeds increase on a street, there can be negative impacts to people walking. Traffic calming is a tool to manage the negative impacts of traffic on the street through physical design and other measures. In addition, as reviewed, speed is a major predictor of injury severity, thus calming traffic will help reduce severe and fatal crashes involving people walking. The Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and Institute of Transportation Engineers have developed the Traffic Calming ePrimer5 in which they provide the following broad categories of traffic calming: • Horizontal deflection requires a person driving a car to navigate around a feature, including: • Curb extensions • Median crossing islands • Lateral shift/chicane (modification to roadway design to eliminate straight, unimpeded section of roadway) • Vertical deflection requires a person driving a car to travel over a feature, such as: • Speed humps/bumps • Raised crosswalks • Raised intersections • Roundabouts utilize both horizontal and vertical deflection • Street width reduction by using tools such as a road diet or lane narrowing • Routing restrictions, closures and turn restrictions such as: • Diverters

172 /// GAP Plan /

WHAT IS TRAFFIC CALMING? The primary purpose of traffic calming is to support the livability and vitality of residential and commercial areas through improvements in non-motorist safety, mobility, and comfort. These objectives are typically achieved by reducing vehicle speeds or volumes on a single street or a street network. Traffic calming measures consist of horizontal, vertical, lane narrowing, roadside, and other features that use self-enforcing physical or psychoperception means to produce desired effects. (Source: FHWA Traffic Calming ePrimer)

• Half or full closures • Median barrier • Turn restriction Traffic calming measures can be applied to projects in this Plan as ways to improve the walkability and safety on Asheville’s streets.

Decorative Crosswalks Increasingly, municipalities are interested in making their downtowns both aesthetically pleasing and friendly for people walking, and one commonly sought-after way to do this is through streetscape elements like colored or decorative crosswalks. Various decorative crosswalk options are available that can be customized to increase crosswalk visibility while not distracting people driving from the road. FHWA issued a memorandum on August 15, 20136 related to decorative crosswalk patterns. Based on the FHWA memorandum, it is possible to develop an aesthetic crosswalk pattern if it meets the following criteria: • No retro-reflective, traffic control or distracting elements within the vehicular traveled way


• Acceptable pattern examples are repetitive such as brick, lattice, cobbles or paving stones

• Enhanced crossings and signal timings for people walking near transit stops;

• Acceptable colors are neutral such as red, rust, brown etc.

• Bus shelters, benches and trash receptacles; and

Any such treatment placed on an NCDOT-maintained roadway needs to be closely coordinated with the Division 13 office to ensure it meets both the FHWA memorandum as well as NCDOT standards.

• Accessible bus stop landings.

Access to Transit Understanding transit in relation to a pedestrian network is important as both modal opportunities offer enhancements to each other and are most effective when seen as a unit. Every person taking transit is also a person walking, and for transit systems to be effective, the “first and last mile” of a person’s transit trip is often taken by foot. The phrase “first and last mile” is frequently used when understanding transportation systems and is not intended to be literal but rather a reference to the first and last leg of a transit trip that is taken on foot. For both systems to work together well, transit and pedestrian networks need to be safe, efficient and connected. This means solutions such as sidewalks connecting to bus stops and bus stops with shelters. The following high-level items are recommended to ensure that transit and pedestrian systems are better integrated: • Include high quality (direct and safe) access to bus stops during project development;

Accessibility for All The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on someone’s disability. Title II of the Act requires cities and towns to have a plan to make accommodations for everyone. Sidewalks, street crossings, and other elements in the public right-of-way can pose challenges to accessibility and many people with disabilities rely on the multimodal network as their primary, or only, way to get from place to place. Creating an equitable transportation system requires that people with disabilities can move about without barriers. To address these challenges, the US Access Board has developed a set of design standards for transportation: the “Proposed Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way”, or PROWAG. The PROWAG addresses people’s access to sidewalks and streets, including crosswalks, curb ramps, street furnishings, pedestrian signals, parking, and other components of public rights-ofway. The goal of the access board in developing these guidelines “is to ensure that access for persons with disabilities is provided wherever a pedestrian way

45

46

Image 45 / Recently Upgraded Transit Stop on Tunnel Road That Needs Additional Crossing Treatments. Image 46 / Unimproved Bus Stop on Tunnel Road Which is One of the Most Heavily Used Transit Corridors in the City.

/

GAP Plan

/// 173


is newly built or altered, and that the same degree of convenience, connection, and safety afforded the public generally is available to pedestrians with disabilities”. Once these guidelines are adopted by the Department of Justice, they will become enforceable standards under Title II of the ADA. Although these guidelines are currently in development, many jurisdictions have adopted them as their local standard. These standards represent industry best practices and should be followed for all future transportation infrastructure projects in Asheville. See the Chapter 6 for more details on the ADA Transition Plan for the Public Right of Way.

47

Image 47 / These Guidelines Propose Accessibility Guidance for the Design, Construction and Alteration of Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way

174 /// GAP Plan /


Chapter 7 Endnotes 1 8 80 Cities. (2020). https://www.880cities.org/ 2 The League of American Bicyclists. (2018). Bicycling and Walking in the United States: 2018 Benchmarking Report. https://bikeleague.org/ benchmarking-report. 3 NCDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Crash Database: 2007-2018 4 EDC-5: Safe Transportation for Every Pedestrian. (2020, May 26). Accessed April 2021 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/ step2.cfm 5 FHWA. (2017). Traffic Calming ePrimer. https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/traffic_calm.cfm 6 MUTCD Official Ruling 3(09)-24(I) – Application of Colored Pavement

/

GAP Plan

/// 175


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


8

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & NEXT STEPS


I prefer walks around neighborhoods to admire architecture and landscapes.” - South Asheville Resident

178 /// GAP Plan /


8

PROJECT D E V E LO P M E N T & NEXT STEPS The Greenway, ADA Transition and Pedestrian Plans identify the network and corridor ideas for the City to pursue. That is because Close the GAP is the guiding plan phase of this process. The following chapter describes the steps that the City will pursue to develop these projects further.

projects vary greatly in complexity and, therefore, vary greatly in the time it takes for implementation. Given this variation in complexity, the priority rankings in this Close the GAP Plan do not reflect the order that projects will be constructed. The rankings reflect the recommended order that funding should be secured to initiate project scoping and preliminary engineering studies to get projects moving toward implementation. One of the key goals of Close the GAP is to improve the consistency in how projects are prioritized for funding in order to move key projects into the project development pipeline.

BEYO N D P R E L I MI NA RY PL A N N IN G The Close the GAP effort comprises what is often referred to as preliminary project planning for the pedestrian projects. It is important to understand that this Close the GAP plan is the first in many steps that are required to deliver a constructed pedestrian facility. From there, a project identified in this Plan will move into the next stages of project development. The projects included in the Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian Plans include some that are new and some that are in a different stage of project development.

Image 48 / Staff at Work on Sidewalk Upgrades in Asheville.

48

The Recommended Project Implementation Process on the following page describes the key steps to take a corridor project from this plan to construction. Although typical time frames are listed for each step,

/ GAP Plan /// 179


Quick Sheets #9:

Recommended Project Implementation Process 1

Project Development (Duration varies)

Project development doesn’t have a time frame, as this is where the concept becomes a project. • Identify project goals • Corridor needs assessment • Feasibility assessment (or feasibility study for more complex projects) • Create a public communications and engagement plan • Identify funding, project delivery approach and permitting needs • Determine stakeholders and a design team • Define scope, goals, budget and schedule • High-level cost estimates and key cost factors (risks)

2

Preliminary Engineering Investigations* (6 to 12 months)

Preliminary engineering will involve proceeding through 30% design prior to finalizing the project scope and budget. • • • • • • •

Collect data and analyze alternatives Develop preliminary improvement concepts Begin public communication / engagement Develop bike and pedestrian facility options Identify environmental / stormwater approach Refine scope, goals, budget and schedule Completion of preliminary engineering is the ideal stage for a capital budget or other funding request.

*The level of detail for preliminary engineering investigations may vary based on project complexity. Simple projects can often move straight into Step 3. More complex projects require a feasibility study which may be initiated early in Step 1, prior to project funding.

3

Final Design (12 to 24 months)

Final design generally has three additional review points at 60%, 90% and 100% design. • • • • • •

Determine type, size and location of bridges or culverts (if needed), usually at 30% Continue public communication / engagement Acquire right-or-way as needed Obtain permits Develop bid package Refine scope, budget and schedule at each review point

4

Construction (12 to 36 months)

Construction is when the road work occurs. • Conduct management / oversight • Maintain quality assurance / quality control • Provide periodic construction status updates to public


FI N E T U NI NG T H E P RO C E SS During the Close the GAP process, several areas were identified in the project development process that may help improve project implementation, if consistently applied. • A goal setting and needs assessment process that includes early public input and an early data collection and constructability review. • Consistency in project planning to make sure that projects are vetted with the public and engineering investigations prior to setting budgets and scope limits. • Flexibility to adjust project scope and budgets as additional engineering is completed and unforeseen project constraints arise. • Develop consistent project pipeline of vetted projects to prepare for future funding. To address these areas for improvement, the team developed the Recommended Project Implementation Process and a Pre-Design Project Development Checklist. This Pre-Design Project Development Checklist should be a key element in the implementation of the City’s Greenway, ADA Transition and Pedestrian Plans as well as all other transportation projects. A few key highlights of these recommendations are as follows: • The Recommended Project Implementation Process on the previous page includes additional guidance on public engagement and the need for integration at all stages of project development, and importantly, before project scope and budget are finalized.

Project Implementation Process. At this point, if the project is recommended to proceed, it would become a standalone project with a line item in the following years’ fiscal budget request. • In order to ensure completion of the ADA Transition Plan, the Pre-Design Project Development Checklist includes an ADA compliance review that, ideally, would be completed consistently with each City transportation project. This will help ensure that accessibility is integrated early in project scoping and will help maximize outcomes for the Plan’s standalone projects, which are expensive and challenging to fund. As such, integration with projects early will help ensure that each project maximizes removal of ADA obstacles, including utility conflicts and right-of-way limitations. This will also help to prevent new projects going to construction that have non-compliant ADA elements from the start. A phased approach may be needed to complete all upgrades; however, this Pre-Design Project Checklist should be a key element in the implementation of the City’s Greenway, ADA Transition and Pedestrian Plans as well as other transportation projects. • Refinements to project scope, goals, budget, and schedule are included at each project development stage as additional engineering reveals project unknowns. This is often complemented by a project Figure 26. Standard Contingency Methodology Order of Magnitude Planning Cost Estimate

40%

Conceptual Level Cost Estimate

• Inclusion of Feasibility Assessments/Studies and Corridor Studies for more complex projects. • The Pre-Design Project Development Checklist (as shown on the following page) can be used for consistent pre-design project vetting to minimize significant scope changes later in the design process that can create public frustration and can limit project outcomes. • Solidify the project scope and the final design and construction budget after preliminary engineering has reached the appropriate level of completion, generally the 30% of final design milestone. The 30% milestone is Step 2: Preliminary Engineering in the Recommended

Based on best available information and historical linear foot (or square foot) costs

35%

Based on additional investigations, conceptual plans with alignments, type of structures, topographic maps etc

Preliminary Eng. Cost (30% Design)

20%

• After preliminary engineering 30% level plans • Based on actual field survey with most features identified including right of way • Based on actual quantities and most closely related unit prices

100% Design Cost

10%

• Based on 100% final plans and plats • After design and permitting is complete • Post utility coordination, property acquitisions and detour planning • Based on final quantities

/

GAP Plan

/// 181


Quick Sheets #10:

Pre-Design Project Development Checklist Duration and complexity of this evaluation varies e.g. Simple sidewalk projects may require minimal research as compared to a corridor study that involves roadway and intersection modifications.

1 Identify Project Goals 2 Corridor Needs Assessment

This evaluation should include items such as: • • • • •

Review of missing sections of sidewalk ADA compliance review Existing traffic data/conditions Pedestrian patterns and crossing needs Development patterns (existing and future)

• Bicycle needs, overlapping neighborhood greenway routes • Overlapping infrastructure needs such as drainage for storm water or repaving • Community feedback and community context (appropriateness of facilities based on community conditions)

Community Feedback Note: This evaluation may require early public surveys or engagement in order to identify local needs. Legacy neighborhoods may require stabilization plans prior to project implementation. As such, extensive neighborhood communication should begin during Step 2: Corridor Needs Assessment. This evaluation may result in revised projects, as well as delays to address stabilization efforts.

3 Feasibility Assessment (or Feasibility Study* for More Complex Projects)

This effort is a high level investigation of physical and environmental constraints that may impact the ability and/or cost to construct a new pedestrian facility or upgrade existing facilities. It is also helpful for identifying key project risks that may need additional investigation before the scope and cost can be defined. This evaluation should include items such as: • Environmental features (e.g. wetlands, threatened and endangered species, waterways) • Physical constraints (e.g. steep slopes, buildings and private property impacts) • Right of way availability (property ownership or the ability to acquire property for facilities) • Utilities and railroad lines *More complex projects may require a detailed feasibility study with more robust data collection in order to clearly define the project scope and budget requirements.

4 High-Level Cost Estimates and Key Cost Factors

Planning level costs estimates serve as a placeholder, or preliminary cost estimate for funding agencies. Since these costs are completed before engineering, some costs will be unknown and should be flagged as key cost variations for further investigation. Examples include possible hazardous waste sites, soil testing and flood studies.

5 Create a Public Communications and Engagement Plan

Legacy neighborhoods may require stabilization plans prior to project implementation. As such, this neighborhood communication should begin during Step 2: Corridor Needs Assessment. This evaluation may result in revised projects, as well as delays to address stabilization efforts.

6 Identify Funding and Determine Project Delivery Approach and Permitting Needs Examples of funding sources include federal, state, MPO, local, and private partnerships. See Appendix ### for a detailed funding guide.

7 Determine Stakeholders and Design Team & Advance to Preliminary Engineering


Quick Sheets #11:

FAQ’s on Project Development & Next Steps

What to Expect How long will it take? Each project varies in complexity and the order of priority should not be interpreted as order of construction. It is important to acknowledge that the timeline for planning, designing and constructing new sidewalks can vary greatly. A simple short sidewalk section on City roads that does not require purchasing private land could potentially be designed and built in 6 months if there are no complicating factors such as retaining walls, bridges or need for curbing and drainage infrastructure. However, a corridor project such as Swannanoa River Road could be 10 years in the future. This project must follow NCDOT and Federal funding requirements and permitting and includes the purchase of substantial land (right of way), design of bridges and evaluation of environmental and flood impacts.

What if our community has been traditionally under-served and we are concerned about improvements impacting our housing affordability? During the Close the GAP equity evaluation and public engagement outreach, several communities expressed this concern. As such, all projects in those communities have been listed as tentative. A detailed community planning effort is recommended to refine the needs and desires of the community before the projects listed move into funding and development.

Will I have a chance to comment and be involved in the projects? The opportunity for public involvement will continue as projects move through this process. Similar to the timeline for construction discussion above, the higher the level of complexity of a project and the greater the impacts, the more opportunity there should be in the process for public input. Public comment begins in this planning and funding stage of projects and continues each time a project moves through Council’s agenda. In addition, the project design process includes input throughout, in order to ensure that the design meets the needs of the community.

/

GAP Plan

/// 183


cost estimating methodology that includes a contingency that is highest at early planning stages and decreases as design is finalized and the number of unknowns decreases. An example of this best practice is shown in Figure 26.

Project Development When NCDOT or Federal Funds are Involved Once this plan is complete, projects will be selected to move forward into the NCDOT prioritization process, known as SPOT. Projects selected to be funded will then move into the NCDOT project development process for design, approvals and clearances, right of way acquisition and construction.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) The NEPA was one of the first laws (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq. 1969) written that established a broad national framework for protecting our environment. NEPA’s basic policy is to assure that all branches of government give proper consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any major federal action that significantly affects the environment.

When projects are funded with State and Federal transportation dollars, project managers must follow a specific State and Federal project development process. This process includes environmental permitting to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The “pre-design” process for State and Federally funded projects has specific steps and processes as show in Figures 27 and 28.

Figure 27. How to Get Roads Built (Source: https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/Transportation/how-road-gets-built/ Pages/default.aspx)

184 /// GAP Plan /


Figure 28. NCDOT Transportation Planning Process

COMP PLAN

MTP1

SPOT2

TIP3

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

Identify local vision and needs

Identify region’s long range project plan

Identify region’s top projects

Identify the region’s 10-year funding plan

Develop (construct) Projects

20 - 30 year planning horizon

20 year planning horizon, updated every 5 years

Criteria updated periodically

A 10 year plan that is updated every 2 years

Timing depends on size and scope of project

/

GAP Plan

/// 185


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


9

DESIGN & POLICY


Need more sidewalks!! Sidewalks connect communities and promotes health” - East Asheville Resident


9

DESIGN & POLICY The purpose of this chapter is to provide design standards, policy review findings and recommendations that are needed to update implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities so the City may reflect evolving national standards and best practices.

I N TRO D UC T IO N When we think about the ingredients that make up a livable community, a safe and convenient place for people to walk and bike or access the bus for daily activities is at the top of the list. Planners, engineers and project designers rely on standards and policy guidance during implementation and maintenance of pedestrian and bicycle facilities to ensure safety, consistency and predictability. Historically, the resources to design these multimodal facilities have been limited. Over the last 15 years, design guidance has improved, equipping practitioners with the resources to develop ideas and try out innovations seen in other communities and internationally. These advancements in design and policy practice are essential to integrate into local codes, policies and practices, enabling communities to achieve a multimodal transportation network that is more inclusive to people of all ages and abilities and that can be well-customized to the local context.

DESIG N STANDARDS & P OL ICY RE VI E W TASKS As part of the Close the GAP process, the consultant team was tasked with the following policy and standard review in order to develop recommendations to improve implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities for the City. 1. Review of the City of Asheville’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) sections related to Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian facilities. 2. Review of the City of Asheville’s Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) sections related to Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian facilities. 3. Conduct a series of Targeted Focus Groups with NCDOT and various City departments that are responsible for overseeing implementation and maintenance of Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects in the City of Asheville. These meetings focused on policies and procedural challenges to delivering fully ADA compliant pedestrian facilities in the public rights of way. These tasks resulted in a detailed set of policy and design standard recommendations and best practice references that will be useful references for updating City policies and standards. The following sections summarize the findings and key recommendations for each Design Standard and Policy Review task listed above. The full detailed review tables are include in Appendix XX.

/ GAP Plan /// 189


Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Findings and Recommendations The City of Asheville’s UDO is a document that contains regulations that apply to different types of land uses, development, and other regulations. For example, the UDO includes chapters such as Development, Historic Preservation, and Nuisances. In general, the UDO communicates the expectations of the City as it relates to development projects and activities. For example, the UDO requires new sidewalk when someone develops a new multi-family residential development with 10 or more units. The planning team conducted an in-depth review of Asheville’s UDO to identify standards that promote, could be changed to improve, or hinder walkability. The review noted recommended changes to and identified gaps in UDO language. The detailed UDO review and recommendations results are included in Appendix XX. Key UDO recommendations that have the greatest impact on pedestrian mobility in the City have been included in a set of comprehensive Action Items that are listed in Chapter 10.

Asheville Standards Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) Findings and Recommendations Where the UDO communicates when a sidewalk is to be installed (new multi-family units with 10 or more units), the ASSDM outlines how to construct the sidewalk. For example, the ASSDM requires new sidewalks on local streets to include three elements: a 1.5-foot setback from the right-of-way, a 5-foot sidewalk, and a 5-foot utility strip/setback from street or curb edge. These policy and design standards are used to determine such factors as: • Facility selection: shared or separated facilities (sidewalk, greenway, bike lanes etc.) • Facility width • Separation (or buffer) from traffic or features such as streams and steep slopes • Need for facilities on one or both sides of the street • Pedestrian crossing spacing and treatments • Accessibility standards - ADA compliance for ramps, sidewalks, crossings, greenways

Image 49 / A Sample Image and Table from Asheville’s Standards and Design Manual.

49

190 /// GAP Plan /


• Accessibility standards for transit stops and onstreet parking

• Lighting requirements and standards

TARGETED FOCUS GROUP SESSION STRUCTURE

• Temporary traffic control (work zone accommodations for bicycle and pedestrians)

Questions for Each Category

• Trail crossing design (e.g., sight distance, markings and signage)

Existing: How are things done now? Existing Issues / Challenges / Shortfalls.

• Transit stop amenities

• Pedestrian signal standards (including audible pedestrian signal (APS) needs) The detailed ASSDM review and recommendations results are included in Appendix XX. Key ASSDM recommendations that have the greatest impact on pedestrian mobility in the City have been included in a set of comprehensive Action Items that are listed in Chapter 10.

Targeted Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations The following Targeted Focus Group meetings were held with various City departments that are responsible for overseeing implementation and maintenance of Greenway, ADA and Pedestrian projects in the City of Asheville. The following 4 focus group meetings were held: 1. Transportation Department 2. Public Works and Streets Departments 3. Planning and Development Services Departments 4. Capital Projects During the Targeted Focus Group meetings, the planning team covered a series of questions and discussion topics, which are shown to the right. The findings and recommendations are summarized in Table 18.

Special Focus Areas The Close the GAP team was tasked with delving into several policy topics in greater detail: best practices for temporary traffic control, and a review of alternative surfaces for sidewalks (vs. standard concrete). Temporary traffic control and sidewalk maintenance are addressed in Appendices as follows:

Future Goal: If you could change how things are done, what would you change? How should it be done, if differently than today? Target for Future Gap Identification: Needed Resources + Desired Methods/Ideas to Bridge the Gap

CATEGORIES Resources & Planning: Funding: Planning, feasibility studies, cost estimating procedures, design and construction, maintenance, emerging needs and requests Staff: Training (new standards), capacity (e.g. review specificity requires staffing and coordination), inspection forms, internal design Project Implementation (Design Construction): Private development, public works, major projects (local funding - Bond, etc.), major projects (non-City funded, e.g. STBG), NCDOT project coordination Policy Specific: UDO related, ASSDM related, organizations working in the public right-of-way (e.g., utilities), inspection forms, right-of-way and easement acquisition, legal options, complaints and requests, public meetings (accommodations / locations)

Appendix XX: Temporary Traffic Control Guide Appendix XX: Alternatives to Sidewalks

/

GAP Plan

/// 191


Table 18. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category

Recommendation

Investment Considerations

Project Selection & Prioritization Needs Clear equity definition and application guidance.

Clarify policy on transportation equity and process for prioritization.

Policy/Program Development

Funding flexibility for emergency projects and partner matching (grants).

Consider funding set aside for emergency and grant/ partnership opportunities.

Funding Investment

Public facing database with City responses to community sidewalk and ADA related requests (Asheville App and other community requests).

Update Asheville App (or similar) where records, City responses, and actions taken are visible to the public.

Policy/Program Development

Need for more funding to support project implementation

See Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8 for detailed recommendations.

Funding Investment

Project Scoping and ROW Needs Project scope and final budget set with insufficient preliminary engineering and there is a need for contingency or flexibility in scope to address unknown budget issues.

See recommended project implementation process in Chapter 8.

Capital Project Planning Policy

Issues with public expectation on projects that lead to scope creep or public frustration.

See recommended project implementation process in Chapter 8. Consider standard website format for project decision history and graphical documentation of design decisions for public consumption.

Capital Project Planning Policy

Challenges with right of way acquisition that delay sidewalk and greenway projects, and limit ADA compliance. For example, more ADA ramps will be technically infeasible or result in undesireable corner ramps if right of way is not secured earlier in the process.

See recommended project implementation process in Chapter 8.

Capital Project Planning Policy

Limited resurfacing budgets and scoping result in missed opportunities include funding for ADA work, complete streets components such as parking spaces, bike lanes.

Refine resurfacing program to include ADA design and, when possible, a ROW phase. Integrate and coordinate complete streets, capital and Close the GAP ADA corridor projects in the City’s scheduled resurfacing projects. This will requires more funding for resurfacing projects.

Capital Project Planning Policy and Funding Investment

Design Standards, UDO and Policy Update City ADA ramp details and relevant design standards to reflect proposed Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). See detailed recommendations included in the review of Asheville’s Standard Specifications and Details Manual (ASSDM) in Appendix XX. Need updated ADA design standards and review requirements, including driveways.

Modify development and transportation design and review process to require an ADA checklist and approval by designated ADA specialist. Designs should include detailed elevations with ADA measurements. Develop and require technical infeasibility forms (TIFs) for instances where full ADA compliance is not feasible within the scope of work. These forms should be kept on file or uploaded into a GIS database.

192 /// GAP Plan /

Policy/Program Development


Table 18. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations (Continued) Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category

Investment Considerations

Recommendation

Designing for a 2% cross slope often results in non-compliant ramps because designing for the maximum does not allow for construction tolerances (variations).

Modify design standards to less than maximum, for example, 1.5% cross slope vs max 2% to allow for construction tolerances (variations).

Policy/Program Development

Need improved crossing guidance for use of raised crosswalks, lighting, RRFB's, signal features, APS/LPI, etc.

See Chapter 7 for more on crossing recommendations.

Policy/Program Development

The ASSDM contains sidewalk standards based on context, some of which have both a recommended and minimum width standard. Consider adding a recommended and minimum width for all types of sidewalk contexts based in the tiers described in Chapter 4 and other land uses, City plans, etc.

Policy/Program Development

Need a clear sidewalk policy for waivers.

When a sidewalk that is less than the maximum width is requested, require design documentation on constraints prior to accepting minimum widths. Need for ADA on-street parking standards.

Update parking space design and requirements in the ASSDM to reflect PROWAG details.

Policy/Program Development

Updates needed on details for transit stop accessibility.

Update standard ADA details for bus stops. See ASSDM recommendations table.

Policy/Program Development

Update temporary street closure (construction and events) process (see Appendix for more details).

Frequent issues with inadequate access through work zone and temporary sidewalk closures.

Require a detour design and approval submission for any sidewalk or ramp closure and review to ensure detour is in compliance with the MUTCD requirements and proposed PROWAG standards. • consider certification process for selected contractors.

Policy/Program Development

• provide contractor resources on City website with • typical applications and best practices. • consider implementing/revising enforcement / violation fee structure

Need for lighting requirements / standards for sidewalks, crossings and greenways.

Develop a sustainable street light policy and program to address lighting best practices in locations of high pedestrian usage and at pedestrian crossing locations. See example programs in the UDO (Appendix XX) and ASSDM (Appendix XX) recommendations tables.

Policy/Program Development

Enforcement for full ADA compliance for impacted facilities during utility repair work.

Addressed in UDO and ASSDM recommendations.

Enforcement

Lack of greenway details and specifications.

Addressed in Chapter 5 and UDO and ASSDM recommendations.

Policy/Program Development

DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION

Develop review capacity and training.

Evaluate development review staff capacity with respect to ADA Transition Plan recommendations.. Develop staff ADA review training program.

Policy/Program Development

Consider hiring an ADA review specialist, either internal or contracted.

Staff Development

/

GAP Plan

/// 193


Table 18. Focus Group Meeting Findings and Recommendations (Continued) Targeted Focus Groups: Identified Needs by Category

With project partners, there is a need for additional ADA knowledge design and construction.

Recommendation Consider ADA certification for contractors selected on City projects. Certification possibilities include design, construction, inspectors, and work zone traffic control. Provide regular training.

Investment Considerations

Policy/Program Development

Provide best practices resources on website. Include flexibility and advanced planning time for greenway alignments through large parcels. Challenges planning for greenway alignments through undeveloped parcels.

Continue to work with developments through existing density and parking bonus process for voluntary completion of greenway connections.

Policy/Program Development

Consider arrangements to match funds from development greenway easement donations to complete longer stretches of greenway with other grant funding sources.

OTHER ADA COMPLIANCE CHALLENGES Create rapid response program to enforce clearing of encroachments (trash cans, vegetation, signs, snow removal etc). Permanent obstructions such as utility poles/parking meters are covered in the UDO/ASSDM review in Appendix XX.

Policy/Program Development

Infeasible ramps require consistent database to track ADA Transition Plan and document infeasibility.

Develop a technical infeasibility form (TIF) and related submission and approval process. Develop a process for Citywide tracking / database to maintain an updated list of ramps on transition plan. Apply consistently for City, NCDOT and private projects.

Policy/Program Development

Accessible parking requests process/policy.

Develop a public accessible parking space request policy, program and website.

Policy/Program Development

Maintenance of sufficient pedestrian access route (PAR) width Competing public space elements, such as trash cans, snow, utilities, trees, parking meters, etc.

1. Update ramp inspection form to include all accessibility requirements (see best practice examples in the ASSDM review in Appendix XX).

Inconsistent inspection and enforcement of noncompliant ramps.

2. Coordinate with NCDOT inspection forms for NCDOT streets. Establish a consistent form if possible. 3. Consider ADA certification process and training for contractors selected on City projects.

Policy/Program Development

4. Provide best practices resources on website, such as calibration of levels, pre-pour elevation checks, concrete finishing. Complaint process and tracking that is clear and consistent.

Ensure all departments are contacting the official ADA coordinator for any ADA complaint or grievance tracking and outcome documentation. See ADA Transition Plan in Appendix XX for official grievance procedure.

Policy/Program Development

Accessible meetings and special accommodations for public meetings (need policy and process).

Develop/update meeting location checklists for ADA compliance.

Policy/Program Development

Need for official sidewalk maintenance plan document and associated policy.

See Chapter 6, Chapter 8 and Appendix XX: ADA Transition Plan for the Public Right of Way. Consider adopting a maintenance scan and repair process at regular intervals.

Policy/Program Development

194 /// GAP Plan /


External Policy and NCDOT Coordination Findings NCDOT is an important partner in the City’s efforts to improve walkability. There are many NCDOT policies that apply to sidewalk, bikeway, and greenway development. Similar to the City department Focus Group meetings, the team met with NCDOT representatives to discuss design standards and policies that impact the implementation and maintenance of Greenways, ADA and Pedestrian facilities within the City. Some NCDOT policies provide guidance on these issues are as follows: • Complete Streets Policy (2022) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/projects/BikePed/Pages/ Complete-Streets.aspx • Greenway accommodation guidelines (2015) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/ TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/B06_ GWY_GDLNS.pdf • Department of Justice/Department of Transportation Joint Technical Assistance on the Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act Requirements to Provide Curb Ramps when Streets, Roads, or Highways are Altered through Resurfacing (2013) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/ TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/DOJDOT%20Curb%20Ramps%20and%20Resurfacing. aspx • Mid-Block Crossing Guidance (Various) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/Pages/ Teppl-Topic-Original.aspx?Topic_List=C36 • Standard Practice for Pedestrian Reasonable Access Requests from Pedestrians with Qualifying Disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (2003) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/ TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/ Disabled_Ped_Practice.pdf • Pedestrian Crossing Guidance (Various) More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/safety/Teppl/

TEPPL%20All%20Documents%20Library/ Disabled_Ped_Practice.pdf Other policies are specific to design, such as the newly updated Roadway Design Manual (2021) and the Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures document (2018). • More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/projects/Roadway/Pages/RDM. aspx (Roadway Design Standard Link) • More information can be found here: https:// connect.ncdot.gov/resources/Specifications/ StandSpecLibrary/2018%20Standard%20 Specifications%20for%20Roads%20and%20 Structures.pdf (Standard Specifications....) The following NCDOT policy and procedural items were identified during the Close the GAP process as having the greatest impact on the City’s ability to achieve a multimodal transportation network that is more inclusive to people of all ages and abilities. The following priority items and recommendations will require ongoing coordination between the City and NCDOT: 1. Current NCDOT policy dictates that street repaving projects should also include upgrades to curb ramps where the pedestrian access route is modified during repaving. However, this does not address non-compliant PARs at driveway aprons and mid-block sidewalk sections. Although this is standard resurfacing practice in most jurisdictions, the result is a missed opportunity for fully accessible corridors along the most high priority routes in the City (see Chapter 4 for more info on prioritization factors). During NCDOT coordination meetings, participants identified an opportunity to seek additional funding and initiate an early planning and coordination process between the City and NCDOT to combine funding with future resurfacing work to better achieve full corridor compliance. Combining this work is more cost and time efficient than completing this work as separate projects, and offers the best outcome for the traveling public. This process can help to maximize the results achieved with each transportation investment. 2. NCDOT resurfacing policy and budgets include intersection curb ramp upgrades but do not include signal equipment modifications. Ideally, curb ramps and signal push buttons should be updated at the same time to maximize ADA compliance and to allow for better designs (2

/

GAP Plan

/// 195


50

Image 50 / Temporary Traffic Control while RADTIP was Under Development

ramps per corner) and also allow for future audible pedestrian signals (APS) if ramps and push button equipment are spaced properly. As a result of this practice, when intersection curb ramps are upgraded during resurfacing projects, they may not be located in ADA compliant locations relative to signal equipment and the opportunity to provide much needed push buttons is missed. Another negative outcome may result where ramp configurations are not placed in line with signal equipment (e.g., maintaining corner ramps instead of providing one ramp per crossing with a push button). During joint meetings with City and NCDOT staff, the consensus was that additional funding will need to be pursued as a solution to this issue.

196 /// GAP Plan /

3. The NCDOT policy for audible pedestrian signal requests and limited funding make it difficult to expand the APS system in the City of Asheville to assist pedestrians with visual impairments. During NCDOT coordination meetings, an opportunity was identified to create an ADA Advisory Committee that can advise NCDOT on priority locations for APS to maximize the mobility benefits for those with vision impairments. This idea will require additional funding and committee formation discussions to ensure success. 4. During Close the GAP-related ADA focus group meetings, public engagement surveys and field observations, it was noted that work zone traffic control on City and NCDOT roadways has not


consistently maintained accessible routes, per MUTCD standards, during construction. This is a key finding that is impacting mobility throughout the City and further coordination between NCDOT and the City is needed. See Appendix XX for more information on temporary traffic control accessibility guidance.

Other Resources and Design Standards Good pedestrian design is the function of many factors, including connectivity, comfort, continuity and convenience. The following are state and national design guidance resources that collectively work to achieve these multimodal design goals for Close the GAP as well as state and national resources related to designing for people traveling with a disability. It should be noted that, as pedestrian design is constantly evolving and innovating, updates to these resources should be sought out following the publication of Close the GAP. North Carolina Guidance North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Complete Streets Policy A.09.0106 (2019, 2022) Evaluating Temporary Accommodations for Pedestrians (2018) Pedestrian Crossing Guidelines (2018) National Guidance American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Planning, Design and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities (2004) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Intersections (2018) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2009 MUTCD Guidance and Supplemental Information (including NC Supplement) US Access Board Guide to the Standards (2010) Proposed Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) (2011) USDOT/DOJ USDOT ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities (2006)

DOT/DOJ Joint Technical Assistance Memos ADA Standards (2010) Other Multimodal Design Guidance The following includes various other valuable resources that can be applied to both bicycle and pedestrian design, on-street and off-street. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Achieving Multimodal Networks (2016) Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks Design Guide (2017) Strategies for Accelerating Multimodal Project Delivery (2019) Achieving Multimodal Networks: Applying Design Flexibility and Reducing Conflicts (2016) Guidebook for Developing Pedestrian and Bicycle Performance Measures (2016) National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Street Design Guide (2013) Transit Street Design Guide (2016) North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Roadway Design Manual (2018) Complete Streets Policy A.09.0106 (2019, 2022) WalkBike NC: The Statewide Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan (2013) Greenway Accommodations Guidelines (2015) When a Corridor Overlaps with Bicycling Routes Designing for People Bicycling Bicycle design is constantly evolving and innovating. The following are statewide and national resources on designing for people who choose to travel by bicycles. North Carolina Guidance North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Complete Streets Policy A.09.0106 (2019, 2022) National Guidance American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (2012)

/

GAP Plan

/// 197


Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Bikeway Selection Guide (2019) Separated Bike Lane and Planning Design Guide (2015) Incorporating On-Road Bicycle Networks into Resurfacing Projects (2016) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) 2009 MUTCD Guidance and Supplemental Information (including NC Supplement) National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide (2012)

198 /// GAP Plan /


10

TAKE ACTION


Sidewalks, sidewalks, sidewalks! Pedestrian and bike infrastructure makes a city so livable.” “

- North Asheville Resident


10

TA K E A C T I O N Close the GAP is an action-oriented plan that is built off of community desires. For the Plan to be effective, it needs a clear approach to implementation that defines next steps, timeframe, responsible parties, key partners, and performance measures to evaluate success. This approach will allow the City to be strategic yet flexible in the lifetime of this Plan.

O RGA N IZAT IO NA L & PARTN ER F R A ME WO R K Close the GAP will not be implemented solely by the City of Asheville; regional and state agencies, county and neighboring communities, and the private and non-profit sectors will be critical to success. Many of these organizations have been referenced throughout this document, and key partners include the following:

Asheville City Council The City Council will adopt the Plan document and will oversee its implementation. It is also responsible for amending the UDO and other policy related decisions. City Council can make decisions related to the budget to facilitate the implementation of Close the GAP.

City Staff The responsibility for implementation of this plan at the staff level lives in the Transportation Department. However, other departments involved in implementation and policy include: Capital Projects, Public Works, Planning and Urban Design, Equity and Inclusion, Finance and Management Services,

Development Services, and others. Transportation Department staff will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of Close the GAP and progress towards performance measures. They will coordinate with the MPO and NCDOT on funding and project development as well as seek other project development opportunities.

French Broad River MPO The MPO will be responsible for coordinating funding opportunities between the City, County and NCDOT. This includes funding projects through the STIP as well as other opportunities such as through their Planning Work Program.

Buncombe County & Neighboring Jurisdictions Generally what matters most to people walking and rolling is a connected system that allows travel from one location to another. Most people are unaware of City or County boundaries. As such, it is prudent that the City, County and neighboring jurisdictions coordinate to ensure that their greenway and pedestrian networks connect. Specific to Buncombe County, there is an opportunity with their Comprehensive Plan (for which an update is underway at the time of the drafting of this document) and their impending Multimodal Plan (which will be developed) to better align networks. Coordination with the County on sidewalk projects is particularly critical as areas just outside of the City limits are seeing significant growth; these are locations where sidewalks may be expanded through development. Since, in 2012, Asheville was stripped of its ability to annex property through an Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, coordination with the County will be imperative.

/ GAP Plan /// 201


Neighboring jurisdictions that require coordination include Woodfin, Biltmore Forest, Fletcher/Henderson County, and Mills River. See Map 28 for an illustration of Asheville’s neighbors that share a boundary, for which network connections will be critical.

NCDOT Division 13 As discussed in the previous chapter, there are ample opportunities to build upon coordination with Division 13 of NCDOT, which includes the City and Buncombe County. This includes projects in the STIP, resurfacing or roadway/bridge reconstruction projects, and monitoring the construction of the network.

NCDOT Integrated Mobility Division Based out of Raleigh, this division of NCDOT develops guidance on bicycle and pedestrian policy and complete streets, which is critical to project development. They may also fund future plan update funding opportunities through their grant programs, which in part funded Close the GAP.

Developers There are many details that the UDO prescribes related to development, and these offer the City a partner and opportunity to expand the pedestrian network.

Non-Profit Partners Asheville has a long and successful history of working with its non-profit partners to expand its reach and impact in the community. These relationships should be continued to enable Close the GAP to be successful. Certain non-profit partners offer funding opportunities, and others may be recipients of minigrants to better serve the community.

Community Members Similarly, Asheville has a strong history of empowering members of the community to advocate and serve. Through the many committees and commissions that guide decisions at the city, Asheville can continue to tap into the community through these volunteers. In addition, community members generate public support for walking, by talking to their neighbors, friends, colleagues, etc. They advocate to elected officials or others for better projects. Finally, members of the community volunteer at events and programs that make these projects a success.

202 /// GAP Plan /

T H E AC T ION P L AN The Close the GAP Action Plan contains 10 goals related to equity, the Greenway, ADA Transition, and Pedestrian plans, project development, policy, funding, tools, safety, and multimodal integration. The actions will shift as partner and funding opportunities change; however, the following offers a basic structure for the City to initiate these tasks. Each task is numbered, which is not based on priority but for ease of City implementation. Tasks include a brief description of the action, lead department (or departments) that will guide the task, and partner agency or organization to support the task. Timeframe refers to the approximate horizon to indicate when the task should be completed, and how success will be measured is the benchmark to indicate whether a task is completed. The action plan links various actions to project goals. Many action items could apply to multiple goals; however, they are not repeated in each section. The sum result of these actions combined are the key to achieving the Close the GAP vision where “Asheville is a place where vibrant, safe, and comfortable streets and greenways give everyone the opportunity to walk to their destinations and to enjoy the convenience and health benefits of walking.”


Map 28. Regional Connections

1 Woodfin

Mile

Beaver Lake

NORTH

26

240 240 40

40

40

Biltmore Estate

Biltmore Forest

26

CLOSE THE GAP NETWORK Greenway Network Components Pedestrain Network Components

Lake Julian

Bumcombe County Planned Greenway Regional Connection Downtown Asheville City of Asheville Area Cities

AVL Regional Airport

Fletcher

Mills River

/

GAP Plan

/// 203


Table 19. Goal 1: Equity Close the GAP network implementation results in a walkable and accessible community for all, no matter where you live or who you are.

Action #

Action

1.1

Develop a City of Asheville definition for Transportation Equity and metrics to evaluate the equity impact of transportation projects.

Plan Impact

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Lead

Partner

Transportation, Office of Equity N/A and Inclusion

Timeframe

Immediate (0-3 years)

Adopted definition of transportation equity. Metrics to evaluate the equity impact of transportation projects. Number of sidewalk gaps closed in high equity need areas.

1.2

Using Close the GAP and neighborhood input as a guide, prioritize sidewalk gaps and other pedestrian facilities in high equity need areas.

Pedestrian Plan

Transportation, CAPE, Office of Equity and Inclusion

Legacy Neighborhood Coalition

Immediate (0-3 years)

1.3

Work with various City departments and Buncombe County to develop neighborhood stabilization plans to address pedestrian needs and gentrification concerns.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Legacy Transportation, Neighborhood CAPE, Planning Coalition, & Urban Buncombe Design County

Immediate (0-3 years)

204 /// GAP Plan /

How Success Will Be Measured

Number of neighborhood engagement points to determine preferences in addressing pedestrian gaps.

Number of neighborhood stabilization plans developed.


Table 20. Goal 2: Greenway Network City of Asheville residents and stakeholders travel along the greenway network on existing and new types of greenways. Action #

Action

2.1

Secure funding for and develop a neighborhood greenway implementation guidebook that incorporates Close the GAP recommended plan elements (See Chapter 5).

2.2

Increase amount and quality of greenway / natural surface trail information available to users through signage and online data by installing accessible trail markers.

Plan Impact

Greenway

Greenway

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

Transportation, Public Works, FBRMPO Planning & Urban Design

Immediate (0-3 years)

Transportation

N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

How Success Will Be Measured

Development of a City of Asheville Neighborhood Greenway Guidebook

Install accessible trail makers and include information in online greenway information. Trail Guidelines in PDF 2020.pdf (accessrecreation.org) There are a variety of methods to report and benchmark physical activity:

2.3

Use greenway intercept surveys to track and report on commuting trips and physical activity.

Average minutes of physical activity per day per capita. Greenway

Transportation

Connect Immediate Buncombe (0-3 years)

Average minutes of physical activity attributable to active transportation per day. Portion of people regularly using the greenways for active transportation. Number of walking or biking trips.

/

GAP Plan

/// 205


Table 20. Goal 2: Greenway Network (continued) Action #

Action

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured

Mid-Range (4-6 years)

Development and deployment of notice program. Advertisement on the greenway alerts webpage. Consider a banner on other greenway webpages users can click that navigates them to the alerts and closures webpage.

Enhance City’s communication efforts about trail closures, detours, and maintenance projects.

2.4

Integrate greenways closures with the City’s alert system.

Greenway

Transportation, N/A CAPE

Use newly improved Traffic Control guidance to identify on-street rerouting for greenway closures due to construction or weather events.

2.5

Develop an ongoing greenway maintenance scan schedule for greenway corridors to ensure that routes remain accessible.

206 /// GAP Plan /

Greenway and ADA Transition

Transportation, N/A Parks, PW

Immediate (0-3 years)

Schedule/Plan development. Number of greenway accessibility repairs completed.


Table 21. Goal 3: Pedestrian Network Using Close the GAP’s ADA Transition Plan as a guide, the City of Asheville’s pedestrian network is ADA compliant to the maximum extent feasible. Action #

Action

3.1

Develop an ADA Design Checklist and Submission Requirements to include detailed elevations with ADA measurements. Set criteria less than maximum values to accommodate construction tolerances (variations).

3.2

Develop and begin using a technical infeasibility form for design and inspection to document how and why it is technically infeasible to meet ADA requirements during a development project.

Plan Impact

3.3

Partner

How Success Will Be Measured

Timeframe

ADA Transition

Transportation, Public Works, Development N/A Services, Planning & Urban Design

ADA Transition

Transportation, Public Works, Risk Management, N/A Development Services, Planning & Urban Design

Immediate (0-3 years)

ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, Development N/A Services, Planning & Urban Design

Immediate (0-3 years)

Develop a publicly accessible portal to house technical infeasibility documents. Develop a set of ADA Training Programs aimed at designers, reviewers, and field inspectors for internal and external partners. Topics should include Technical Infeasibility Forms and Work Zone Traffic Control.

Lead

Completion of the ADA Design and Submission Requirements.

Immediate (0-3 years)

Number of trainings provided to City staff and outside developers.

Technical infeasible process and forms. Technical infeasible tracking process.

Developed training curriculum. Number of trainings provided.

/

GAP Plan

/// 207


Table 21. Goal 3: Pedestrian Network (continued) Action #

Action Form an ADA Advisory Committee of individuals with disabilities and members of organizations that serve people with disabilities.

3.4

3.5

This committee may provide ADA input on items such as Audible Pedestrian Signal locations, reviewing changes to project funding and order of priority and participation corridor ADA field assessments.

Track and report on ADA Transition Plan progress to document the removal of barriers from the transportation network.

208 /// GAP Plan /

Plan Impact

ADA Transition, Pedestrian

ADA Transition

Lead

Partner

NCDOT (Encourage NCDOT Transportation, membership Risk as an exManagement, officio Public Works member of the ADA Advisory Committee)

Transportation, Public Works, Capital NCDOT Projects, Risk Management

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured

Formation of the ADA Advisory Committee. Immediate (0-3 years)

Number of meetings of the ADA Advisory Committee. Number of projects the ADA Advisory committee provided input on.

Immediate (0-3 years) & Ongoing

As the Transition Plan is implemented, corridors and individual elements will be removed from the Transition Plan. At the end of each year, complete a program review and an annual update report summarizing completed actions and describing any changes in conditions. The report enables tracking of progress in removing accessibility barriers and achieving ADA compliance.


Table 22. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network Using Close the GAP as a guide, the pedestrians in the City of Asheville can walk from home (however one defines home) to key destinations along a network of streets comfortable for people who walk. Action #

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

Action

Use Close the GAP as a guiding plan to create a complete pedestrian network.

Complete projects in the Close the GAP high priority network to increase the number of people walking for transportation and recreation in Asheville.

Use Close the GAP priority project lists to initiate new projects into the project development process yearly to keep a steady stream of projects in development.

Initiate a pilot program for the use of alternatives to sidewalks to expand the pedestrian network.

Plan Impact

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Lead

Transportation, Public Works, Development Services, Planning and Urban Design

Transportation, Parks and Recreation

Partner

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured Number of pedestrian gaps filled.

NCDOT, FBRMPO, Funding Partners

NCDOT, FBRMPO, Funding Partners

Ongoing

Number of crossing gaps filled or improved. Number of other pedestrian amenities added or improved (e.g., signals, signage). Percent of Asheville commuters walking and biking to work (using annual American Community Survey updates).

Ongoing

Number of people walking recorded in annual local counts. Number of people walking recorded in future greenway intercept surveys. Number of new projects identified for the project pipeline each year.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

NCDOT, Transportation, FBRMPO, Public Works, Funding Capital, NCDOT Partners

Reporting on projects implemented: Ongoing

• Number of Pedestrian Priority Network sidewalk gaps filled. • Number of Pedestrian Priority Network crossing gaps filled or improved. Adoption of alternative sidewalk standards.

Pedestrian, ADA Transition

Transportation, Public Works

N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

Number of interim pedestrian improvements (e.g. painted curb extensions and refuge islands, alternative pedestrian walkways constructed).

/

GAP Plan

/// 209


Table 22. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network (continued) Action #

Action

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

Promote clear sidewalks through a “Keep it Clear” community education and enforcement campaign.

4.5

Create “Keep it Clear” rapid response program to enforce clearing of encroachments (e.g. trash cans, vegetation, signs, snow).

How Success Will Be Measured

Number of “Keep It Clear” points of education. Number of enforcement activities associated with the “Keep It Clear” campaign. ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, CAPE

Neighborhood Associations

Immediate (0-3 years)

Number of communications educating public about sidewalk maintenance See Examples: https:// docs.google.com/ document/d/1RTmLdHLaGImtoOeCrpG_ QU6BpwPyR2NGbTYUQ7 XAk/edit

Expand property owner education regarding responsibility for maintaining sidewalks.

Crossing opportunities can be evaluated in a number of ways — along a specific roadway, as an average measure for a particular area, or related to intersections.

4.6

Using guidance from Close the GAP, improve the number and quality of pedestrian roadway crossings across the City.

Examples of measures include: ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, NCDOT Capital Projects

Immediate (0-3 years)

Decrease linear distance along a corridor between legal crossing opportunities. Decrease linear distance along a corridor between marked crosswalks. Decrease linear distance along a corridor between signalized crossings. Increase the number of intersections with crossings of all intersection legs.

210 /// GAP Plan /


Table 22. Goal 4: Pedestrian Network (continued) Action #

Action Develop a plan/ program and schedule for routine sidewalk maintenance scans along high priority corridors to ensure that routes remain accessible.

4.7

This program may include specifics on less costly sidewalk repair methods such as patching, crackfilling, wedging, flexible pavement applications, mud-jacking, and grinding/cutting (beveling).

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured

Develop schedule and plan. ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, N/A Public Works

Mid-Range (4-6 years)

Track scan and repair progress with ADA Transition Plan database. Expand repair methods to include lower cost solutions.

/

GAP Plan

/// 211


Table 23. Goal 5: Project Development Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has increased capacity to deliver quality pedestrian projects. Action #

Action

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

Leverage City of Asheville and NCDOT resurfacing projects to accelerate Close the GAP and complete street project implementation.

5.1

Work with departments and agencies to ensure that ADA upgrades and planned and budgeted for in resurfacing projects (e.g., right of way acquisition, curb ramp design, signal upgrades).

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, NCDOT Capital Projects

Ongoing

5.2

Transportation, Public Works

NCDOT

Immediate (0-3 years)

Plan for and implement cross jurisdictional pedestrian projects.

5.3

Form a regular working group to coordinate Close the GAP pedestrian projects with Buncombe County and other adjoining municipal planning efforts, particularly in the City’s former extra-territorial jurisdiction (ETJ).

5.4

212 /// GAP Plan /

Number of ROWs identified / secured early in project planning steps. Form working group.

Greenway, Pedestrian

Transportation, Planning and Urban Design, Development Services

Buncombe County, Woodfin, Biltmore Forest, Fletcher

Ongoing

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, FBRMPO, Public Works, NCDOT Development Services, Capital Projects

Working with Buncombe County and other municipalities, prioritize projects important to cross-jurisdictional connectivity. Identify and implement two to three crossjurisdictional projects in the next 5 to 10 years.

As Buncombe County updates its plans and ordinances, work with the county to develop a coordinated pedestrian network in urbanized areas adjoining the City. Develop consensus in City departments to adopt and use the transportation project development checklist. See Chapter 8 project development checklists.

Include a schedule of City and NCDOT repaving projects in the City’s project planning and development process. Number of Close the GAP projects completed during resurfacing.

Identify a source of matching funds to partner with NCDOT to leverage their resurfacing projects to complete full corridor ADA upgrades. Refine the City’s existing right of way policy and process to maximize ability to ADA achieve ADA compliance and Transition accomplish Close the GAP project implementation.

How Success Will Be Measured

Immediate (0-3 years)

Resolution of departmental adoption.


Table 23. Goal 5: Project Development (continued)

Action #

Action

5.5

Continue project development collaboration with NCDOT by continuing the City / NCDOT monthly Pedestrian Working Group.

5.6

5.7

5.8

Continue to work with NCDOT on integration of pedestrian, bicycle, greenway facilities in accordance with the evolving NCDOT Complete Streets process.

Review the Close the GAP project lists and project status and form consensus in advance of the next round of major transportation system projects to advocate for and submit through the FBRMPO/ NCDOT SPOT Process

Increase land development incentives and mechanisms available to the development community to participate in Close the GAP project development.

Plan Impact Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured Number of monthly meetings in a year.

Transportation

NCDOT

Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works, NCDOT Development Services, Capital Projects

Number of projects advanced through the Pedestrian Working Group.

Ongoing

Immediate (0-3 years)

Use of NCDOT Complete Streets Checklists with project development – adapt as needed. Integration of Close the GAP project in NCDOT Project Development. There are a number of ways to track progress, examples include:

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, City Council

NCDOT, FBRMPO

Immediate (0-3 years)

Number of projects from adopted corridor studies. Number of projects developed in partnership with NCDOT.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Development Services, Planning & Urban Design

NCDOT

Increase the number (or percentage) of the Close the GAP projects implemented through private development:

Ongoing

Decrease in the number of ADA non-compliant sidewalks and curb ramps.

/

GAP Plan

/// 213


Table 24. Goal 6: Policy Using Close the GAP as a guide, the City of Asheville has updated and new policies to guide pedestrian and greenway network development. Action #

6.1

6.2

Action Using the detailed review of the City’s UDO included with Close the GAP, update the UDO to facilitate pedestrian network implementation. Using the detailed review of the City’s SSDM included with Close the GAP, update the SSDM to facilitate pedestrian network implementation. Expand the number and types of pedestrian-oriented tools available in the ASSDM.

6.3

6.4

Work with Planning and Urban Design to evaluate current lighting standards and update standards as needed to increase lighting in high pedestrian areas, at crossings, and along greenways. Working with the City’s legal department (and other departments as needed), investigate utility agreements to reduce utility obstructions in the Public Access Route (PAR). Strengthen enforcement to ensure that utility company work within the public right of way is ADA compliant.

6.5

6.6

Improve work zone traffic control for pedestrians with an updated policy and development of a work zone traffic control handbook. Utilize work zone traffic control checklist (Appendix ##). Update the Neighborhood Sidewalk program using Close the GAP as a guide. Include neighborhood greenways and alternatives to sidewalks (see Appendix ##)

214 /// GAP Plan /

How Success Will Be Measured

Plan Impact

Lead

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, Planning & Urban Design, Development Services

N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

Updated UDO standards.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, Planning & Urban Development, Development Services

N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

Updated SSDM standards.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works, Development Services

Duke Energy

Immediate (0-3 years)

Updated lighting standards in the UDO and SSDM.

Partner

Timeframe

Revised agreements with utility companies.

ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Legal, Public Works, Development Services

Utility Companies

Immediate (0-3 years)

Revised standards for work in the public right of way.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works, Development Services

Development Community

Immediate (0-3 years)

Updated policy and guidebook.

ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation

N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

Update guidance to align with Close the GAP plans. Increase the annual amount of funding allocated for this program.


Table 25. Goal 7: Funding The City of Asheville has identified adequate, consistent, and wide-ranging funding sources to implement the Close the GAP Network. Action #

Action

7.1

Increase the general fund annual allocation for Close the GAP network implementation.

7.2

Increase the general fund annual allocation for ADA Transition plan implementation.

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured

Greenway, Pedestrian

Transportation, Finance & N/A Management, City Council

Track annual allocation Immediate dedicated (0-3 years) for network implementation.

ADA Transition

Transportation, Finance & Management, N/A Risk Management, City Council

Track annal allocation Immediate dedicated for ADA (0-3 years) Transition Plan implementation. Track adopted measures resulting in dedicated funding sources.

7.3

Explore options to secure a dedicated funding source for Close the GAP implementation.

7.4

To address funding needs for unexpected projects and partner or grant matching funds, identify a source of set aside funds (or a quick response policy) to respond to partnership opportunities.

7.5

Establish a method to encourage developer / other partner participation in greenway design and construction. Explore opportunities to use developer participation as matching funds for other funding sources.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Budget, City N/A Council

Transportation, Budget, City N/A Council

Use a measure to Mid – benchmark active Range (4-6 transportation years) funding: per capita investment, proposed miles, active transportation mode split. Track the value of set aside Mid-Range funds available to (4-6 years) respond to grant and partnership opportunities.

Developed policy. Greenway

Transportation, Development Legal Community

Immediate Amount of (0-3 years) developer participation.

/

GAP Plan

/// 215


Table 26. Goal 8: Tools Using a variety of existing and new technology and communication tools, the City of Asheville and its residents and stakeholders are informed about Close the GAP implementation progress and can interact with the City to request / share emerging needs.

Action #

Action

8.1

Update the Asheville App (or similar) where records, City responses, and actions taken are visible to the public and data from the App can assist with City decisions.

8.2

The City is required to track and annually report on its ADA Transition Plan progress. Working with the City’s IT / GIS departments, develop a systematic project tracking ADA system for data entry when Transition corridors are evaluated for Plan detailed ADA compliance, as well as uploading ADA design checklists, inspection forms, and Technically Infeasible Forms (TIFs).

8.3

Update the City public meeting checklists to ensure ADA compliance at public meetings. The checklist should include a list of accessible meetings locations, special ADA accommodations resources Transition and use policy. Also identify a Plan funding pool to hire American Sign Language interpreters, creation of accessible documents, and respond to other accommodations requests.

CAPE, Risk Management, Finance & Management

8.4

Develop a policy, process and program that includes an easy-to-use web-based tool that allows residents to request accessible parking locations.

Transportation, Parking N/A Services, IT & GIS, CAPE

216 /// GAP Plan /

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner Timeframe

Updated App

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

ADA Transition Plan

How Success Will Be Measured

To be determined.

N/A

Information Technology, GIS, N/A Transportation, Development Services

Immediate (0-3 years)

Immediate (0-3 years)

Examples of how data is used in transportation decisions.

Launch of the ADA Transition Plan tracking tool. Annual reporting per ADA Transition Plan for the Public Rightof-Way.

Developed Policy Meetings held in fully accessible locations. N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

Immediate (0-3 years)

Accomodations provided (e.g. sign language interpreters or audible format of materials).

Accessible parking request policy and process. Accessible parking request tool.


Table 26 Goal 8: Tools (continued)

Action #

Action

8.5

Develop a single landing portal / communication dashboard (such as the dashboard used to report on bond project process) to provide Close the GAP project development updates and information, communication about the development process, and project engagement opportunities.

8.6

To build the case for active transportation funding and program expansion, expand the City’s regular pedestrian counting systems and practices to include point in time counts as well as permanent counts.

Plan Impact

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Lead

How Success Will Be Measured

Partner Timeframe

Transportation, Capital N/A Projects, IT & GIS, CAPE

Transportation, Bike/Ped Task N/A Force

Ongoing

Launch of the project portal.

Ongoing

Standard practices for manually and/ or automatically counting pedestrians in place Additional data sets for use in reporting out for project funding and needs analyses.

/

GAP Plan

/// 217


Table 27. Goal 9: Safety As a result of implementing pedestrian safety best practices, pedestrian crashes in the City are significantly reduced. Action #

Action

9.1

Using strategies in and implementing projects from Close the GAP, reduce number of pedestrian crashes of all injury types.

9.2

Significantly reduce pedestrian crashes resulting in death or serious injury by developing and implementing a citywide Vision Zero strategy.

Plan Impact Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Lead

Partner

Transportation, Public Works, NCDOT Asheville Police Department

Transportation, Public Works, NCODT Asheville Police Department

Timeframe

Immediate (0-3 years)

Immediate (0-3 years)

How Success Will Be Measured

Reduction in crash rates.

Adoption of a Vision Zero Action Plan. Implemented Vision Zero action items. Development of a share the road campaign. Examples: “Driving Change” from Grand Rapids, Michigan. http://grdrivingchange. org/

9.3

Promote a shared sense of civility among all roadway users through share the road / safe road behavior programming.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, CAPE, NCDOT

N/A

Mid – Range (4-6 years)

“Everyone is a Pedestrian”, US Dept. of Transportation. https://www. trafficsafetymarketing. gov/get-materials/ pedestrian-safety/ everyone-pedestrian “Heads Up”, Eureka, California. https://bit. ly/3J505fh San Francisco MTA safety campaigns: https://www. sfmta.com/educationcampaigns

218 /// GAP Plan /


Table 27. Goal 9: Safety (continued)

Action #

Action

Plan Impact

9.4

Review crash data collection reporting issues and develop a plan to improve reporting system for better safety evaluations.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

9.5

Improve pedestrian safety along corridors with high safety scores and known crash history by using pedestrian countermeasures such as those identified in the Close the GAP plan and document in other national guidance.

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Lead

Partner

Transportation, Asheville Police NC Department, Highway Asheville Fire Patrol Department

Transportation

N/A

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured

Immediate (0-3 years)

Corrected inconsistencies between NCDOT, PBIN and City of Asheville crash statistics to better support crash analytics for more meaningful safety evaluations.

Ongoing

Number of projects identified or implemented in along high crash corridors.

/

GAP Plan

/// 219


Table 28. Goal 10: Multimodal Vision Close the GAP is integrated with other multimodal plans and programs to reach the City’s overall multimodal vision. Action #

Action

10.1

To integrate the areas where Close the GAP overlaps with City bicycling goals, update the City of Asheville’s Bicycle Plan.

10.2

As noted in the City’s SSDM, incorporate additional Complete Streets Design Guidance to standardize complete streets element selection, context considerations and design details for elements that enhance the quality of the pedestrian experience and the balancing of all modes within the City’s right-of-way.

10.3

Develop an updated policy to address the use of e-devices (scooters, ebikes, Onewheels, etc.) on public streets, sidewalks, and greenways.

10.4

10.5

Plan Impact

Lead

Partner

Timeframe

How Success Will Be Measured

FBRMPO, NCDOT Integrated Mobility Division

Immediate (0-3 years)

An integrated and updated bicycle plan.

Greenway

Transportation

Greenway, ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works, NCDOT Development Services, Capital Projects

Mid-Range (4-6 years)

Updated design manual.

ADA Transition, Pedestrian

Transportation, Public Works

N/A

Immediate (0-3 years)

An adopted e-device use policy.

Work with partners to update the City’s Greenway, pedestrian and greenway Pedestrian wayfinding system.

Transportation, Planning & Urban Design, Public Works

Buncombe County TDA, Funding Partners

Mid-Range (4-6 years)

Expanded and implemented pedestrian wayfinding system.

Encourage more programs, events, and projects that create a car-free environment.

220 /// GAP Plan /

Greenway,

Greenway, Pedestrian

Transportation, Parks and Recreation

FBRMPO, Community Ongoing Organizations

Number of open streets events per year. Number of car-free streets (temporarily or permanently closed to cars).


11 1

APPENDICES


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing


APPENDIX #: ADA PROJECT LISTS Table Column Descriptions 1.

Map ID

2. Road Name 3. Segment 4. Current Funding Status Not Funded Funded: Noted as funded as a City of Asheville bond project, a City or NCDOT Resurfacing project, or a funded NCDOT project (which may also include City matching funds) Partial Funding: Overlapping funded project (noted) does not cover all of the corridor needs. Planned (MTP): This project has been identified in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Study Complete: A corridor study* has been completed with recommendations to move forward into further study and/or project development. 5. Next Step for Project Implementation Fund Planning*: Additional planning is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs. Fund Feasibility Study: Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Fund Preliminary Engineering: These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost. Submit for Prioritization: The next step for unfunded but planned MTP projects is prioritization through the FBRMPO and NCDOT’s SPOT process. Design, Right-of-Way, Construction: Next step for funded projects. 6. Project Description: Initial description based on preliminary project needs assessment or, if funded, the associated project scope and description. 7.

Project Pedestrian/ADA Needs: Initial assessment to identify needs related to sidewalk gaps, existing sidewalk conditions (including ADA non-compliance) and pedestrian crossings.

8. ADA Condition Scan: Results of a desktop scan of existing sidewalks along the corridor to assess ADA compliance of existing sidewalks. 1 – ADA Compliant*: 2 – Good Condition: 3 – Fair Condition: 4 – Moderate Condition: 5 – Poor Condition:

Remove from ADA Transition Plan Needs Compliance Review Needs ADA Upgrades in Spots (Specific Locations) Needs Many ADA Upgrades Needs Significant ADA Upgrades (Full Sidewalk Reconstruction for Much of the Corridor) *Note: Based on the Corridor Approach, no corridors were deemed fully compliant as full detailed ADA assessments have not been conducted as part of this process. For more on the Corridor Approach and when this assessment will be completed, see Chapter 6 of the report.



Map ID #

Segment

Total Score

Tunnel Rd

New Haw Creek Rd to Porters Cove Rd

19

2.A

Biltmore Ave

Southside Ave to Thompson St

18

2.B

Fairview Rd (Alt US 74)

Swannanoa River Rd to School Rd

18

2.C

Merrimon Ave (US 25)

I-240 Interchange

18

2.D

Merrimon Ave (US 25)

I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd

2.E

Patton Ave (US 19/23; Alt US 74)

Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd to I-240 Interchange

Tunnel Rd

Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd

Tunnel Rd

Tunnel Rd to Chunns Cove Rd

1.A

3.A

3.B

Road Name

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study recommends Biltmore and McDowell Greenway Connector Option A: Remove a travel lane on Biltmore Ave for a sidepath or separated bicycle facility between Southside and Caledonia Road.

Widen Sidewalks (or Sidepath) &/or Buffer from Traffic; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

Fund Planning

Sidewalk on West Side between Swannanoa River Rd and First Signal at Shopping Center. Investigate Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Needs at Old Charlotte Highway

Connection to Future Greenway; Residential Housing; Retail and Transit

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

18

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

18

Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)

Right of Way for Bond

Bond Match; 80% LAPP Funded

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades create a multiuse sidepath.

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

Grouped Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades create a multiuse sidepath.

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

Study recommends a sidepath (south side) from the Tunnel to I-240; includes roadway and intersection ADA Upgrades; Improved Crossings and Conversion improvements. Widen sidewalk through the interchange to to Greenway create a multiuse sidepath.

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

17

3.C

Tunnel Rd

I-240 Interchange

17

Study Complete

ADA Compliance Review - See Overlapping Greenway Project

3.D

Hendersonville Rd (US 25)

Rock Hill Rd to NC 280

17

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

See Hendersonville Road Study

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

3.E

Charlotte St

I-240 Interchange

17

Planned (MTP) Fund Short Term ADA Upgrades

Submit for Prioritization

MTP Proposed Modern Roundabout Interchange. Recommend Short Term ADA Signal Upgrades Due to Recent Crashes

Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

3.F

Smokey Park Hwy Sand Hill Rd to Old (US 19/23; Alt US Haywood Rd 74)

17

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.G

Patton Ave (US 19/23; Alt US 74)

4.A

Biltmore Ave (US Patton Ave to Hilliard 25) Ave

4.B

McDowell St (US 25)

Old Haywood Rd to Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd

Entire Street

Fund Planning Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project to Include Bike/Ped in the MTP (Not Funded)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

16

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades Possible Road Diet for Reduced Pedestrian Exposure

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

16

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommended the Following Under Biltmore and Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) McDowell Greenway Connector Option B: Remove a travel and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & lane on McDowell Street to provide a sidepath on one More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades side of the street.

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

17

Planned (MTP)

Study Complete


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan

Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Fund Planning

Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening for Sidepath for Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening Overlapping Bicycle Needs for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

16

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

Sand Hill Rd to Patton Ave

16

Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022

Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)

Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

Haywood Rd

I-240 to Sand Hill Rd

16

Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022

Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)

Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

4.J

Sweeten Creek Rd (Alt US 25)

Crayton Rd to Rock Hill Rd

16

Planned (MTP)

Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

5.A

Broadway St

Patton Ave to I-240

15

Widen Sidewalk Where Feasible

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

4.C

S. Charlotte St

I-240 to Biltmore Ave

16

4.D

Hendersonville Rd (US 25)

I-40 to Rock Hill Rd

16

4.E

Hendersonville Rd (US 25)

I-40 Interchange

16

4.F

Merrimon Ave (US 25)

WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd

16

4.G

Broadway St

I-240 Interchange

4.H

Haywood Rd

4.I

Entire St

15

Planned (MTP)

Study Complete

Submit for Prioritization

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study recommends parallel greenway along the west side Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) of I-240 connecting to Tunnel Road near southern mall and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & access. Connects to Swannanoa River Road as a sidepath More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades along the east side.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening East Side for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

5.B

S Tunnel Rd

5.C

Hendersonville Rd (US 25)

Biltmore Ave to I-40

15

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South

5.D

Long Shoals Rd (NC 146)

Hendersonville Rd to Overlook Dr

15

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan

Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.E

Long Shoals Rd (NC 146)

Schenck Parkway to Overlook Dr

15

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan

Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

North Side Construction; Submit for Prioritization for Remaining

Planned Access Management Project in MTP to Include Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & Possible Multiuse Sidepath) More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.F

Airport Rd (NC 280)

Watson Rd to Hendersonville Rd

15

Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining

5.G

Airport Rd (NC 280)

Town of Fletcher Boundary

15

Planned (MTP)

Fund Preliminary Eng

Access Management Project To Include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)

Fund Preliminary Eng for Remainder (Construction 2022 for Section under I-26)

Partially Funded - NCDOT pedestrian improvements from US 19/23 northbound exit ramp to north of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive). Needs sidewalk and crossings for remainder of limits.

Complete Sidewalk One Side (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.H

Broadway St

WT Weaver Blvd to I-26 Interchange

15


Map ID #

5.I

Road Name

Haywood Rd

Segment

Beverly Rd West to I-240

Total Score

15

Funding Status

Next Step

Funded (NCDOT# HL-0003) Construction 2022

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Resurfacing+ Project (ADA Upgrades)

Pedestrian Signals and Corridor ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

14

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accomodations Plan

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection) & Widen &/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

Biltmore Ave (US Southside Ave to 25) Hilliard Ave

14

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

6.C

New Haw Creek Rd

Arco Rd to Beverly Rd

14

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

6.D

Merrimon Ave (US 25)

Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd

14

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

6.E

Broadway St

I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd

14

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Planed modernization project to include a road diet and pedestrian upgrades from Chestnut Street to I-240.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

6.F

Haywood Rd

Beverly Rd West to Roberts St/Clingman Ave Traffic Cir

14

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

7.A

Clingman Ave

Entire St

13

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

7.B

College St & Tunnel Rd

Charlotte St to Beaucatcher Tunnel

13

Fund Planning

ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)

Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Connections to Planned Tunnel Road Sidepath (to the East)

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

8.A

Brevard Rd (NC 191)

I-240 to Haywood Rd

12

Fund Planning

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Enhancements; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

8.B

Sardis Rd (NC 112)

Country Meadows Dr to Sand Hill Rd

12

ROW 2025/ Construction 2028

Roadway Modernization Project from US 19/23 to Brevard Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & Road (NC 191). Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Consider Sides and Bike Lanes. Multiuse Sidepath to Connect Planned Greenways.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

8.C

Montford Ave

I-240 Interchange

12

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

8.D

Louisiana Ave

Haywood Rd to Patton Ave

12

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

8.E

Sand Hill Rd

Wendover Rd to Haywood Rd

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Neighborhoods and Evaluate Future Land Uses along N. Bear Creek Road

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

8.F

Mills Gap Rd

Hendersonville Rd to Alpine Ridge Dr

12

ROW 2022/ Construction 2024

Roadway Modernization Project from US 25 to Weston Road. Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.

Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades.

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

8.G

Swannanoa River One Way to Bryson St Rd

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.A

Amboy Rd Bridge

French Broad River Bridge

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

ROW 2025/ Construction 2030

Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

9.B

N. Louisiana Ave

Patton Ave to north of Hazel Mill Rd

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-6162)

ROW 2025

Roadway modernization project to include completion of sidewalks both sides and bicycle lanes.

Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

9.C

Wood Ave

Swannanoa River Rd to Future St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

6.A

Brevard Rd (NC 191)

6.B

I-240 to Stradley Mtn Rd/Ridgefield Blvd

Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)

Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)

12


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades (Consider Overlapping Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study Recommendations) Including a Sidepath between Biltmore Ave and McDowell St.

Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Study Complete

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades (Consider Overlapping Biltmore/McDowell Corridor Study Recommendations) Including a Sidepath between Biltmore Ave and McDowell St.

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommends Widening the Sidewalk on the West Side for a Sidepath to Connect to Swannanoa River Greenway to the North and Biltmore Village Sidepath to the South.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.D

All Souls McDowell St to Crescent (US 25) Hendersonville Rd

9.E

Brooke & Lodge St

Entire Street

9.F

Biltmore Ave

Thompson St to Hendersonville Rd US 25

11

9.G

Overlook Dr

NC 146 to Springside Rd

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

9.H

Rosscraggon Rd and Rathfarnham Entire St Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.I

Beaverdam Rd

Merrimon Ave to Kimberly Ave

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.J

Amboy Rd

Entire St

11

ROW 2025/ Construction 2029

Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.K

Sand Hill Rd (NC 112)

Lake Dr to Sardis Rd

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

9.L

Southside Ave (US 25)

Entire St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gaps (Both Sides) ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.M

Biltmore Ave to Bryson St (US 81) Swannanoa River Rd

ROW 2029

Roadway widening and modernization project. Includes complete streets elements (sidewalks/bike lanes and/ or greenway). Project to be coordinated with Swannanoa River Greenway.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

11

11

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing



Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Clingman Ave/ Haywood St to Biltmore Ave

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Review Remaining Corridor for ADA Compliance and Crossing Needs

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

A. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

Total Score

Funding Status

18

Planned Repaving Project (Includes ADA) Planned Protected Bike Lane Project (College St to Biltmore Ave)

Fund Planning to Address Remaining Pedestrian Needs

ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)

Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)

Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding

Next Step

Pedestrian Project Descriptions

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

1.A

Patton Ave

2.A

Lexington Ave

Entire St

15

2.B

Haywood St

Entire St

15

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings for Sections Not Included in Recent Improvements

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.A

Hilliard Ave

Entire St

14

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

3.B

Asheland Ave

Hilliard Ave to Phifer St/ Southside Ave

14

Fund Planning

Low Traffic Volumes and Wide Roadway ROW combined with Underutilized Land Use Make this Corridor a Candidate for a Land Use and Transportation Study

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings (Reduce Pedestrian Crossing Widths)

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

3.C

Asheland Ave

Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave

14

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

3.D

Valley St

College St to Hazzard St

14

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.A

Church St

Entire St

12

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks (Prioritize East Side Completion) B. Improved Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.B

Battery Park Ave

Entire St

12

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.C

Woodfin & Oak Sts

Entire St

13

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.D

College St

Patton Ave to Spruce St

12

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.E

Livingston St

Entire St

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Livingston Neighborhood

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Traffic Calming and Shorter Crossings

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

4.F

Hospital Dr

Entire St

12

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

4.G

Lakeshore Dr

Shorewood Dr to Merrimon Ave

12

ADA Compliance Review

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

4.H

Montford Ave

Entire Street

12

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.I

Chestnut St

Merrimon Ave to Broadway St

12

4.J

Kenilworth Rd

Tunnel Rd to Pickwick Rd

12

Fund Preliminary Eng

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Sidewalk Extension from Aurora Dr to Beaucatcher Rd (Approx 1800 ft); Plus 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.K

Fairview Rd

Sweeten Creek Rd to School Rd

12

Fund Planning

A. Spot Sidewalks B. 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

4.L

College St

Charlotte St to Spruce St

12

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Next Step

Pedestrian Project Descriptions

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

5.A

Shiloh Rd

Entire St

11

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.B

Battle Square

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.C

Walnut St

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

5.D

Coxe Ave

Entire St

11

Southside Ave to Patton Ave Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding

A. Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations from Southside Avenue to Patton Avenue B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.E

Wall St

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.F

O'Henry Ave

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.G

Otis St

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.H

N French Broad Ave

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.I

S French Broad Ave

Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave

11

ADA Compliance Review Evaluate Future Bike/Ped Connection Needs Due to I-26

A. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades B. Possible Additional Needs to Connect to New Greenway (I-26 Project)

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.J

Roberts St

Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext north to Traffic Cir

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Sidewalk One Side

Sidewalk and Crossings

5.K

Depot St

Livingston St to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.L

Victoria Rd

Hospital Dr to Fernihurst Dr

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.M

Victoria Rd

Fernihurst Dr to Meadow Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.N

S French Broad Ave

Hilliard Ave to Livingston St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.O

Riverside Dr

I-240 to I-26 Ramp

12

ADA Compliance Review

Recently Constructed

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

5.P

State St

Entire Street

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.Q

Murdock Ave

Entire Street

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.R

Hill St

Montford Ave to Atkinson St

11

Fund Planning

2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

5.S

Wood Ave Wood Ave and and Cedar St Cedar St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap One Side with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.T

Short McDowell St

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

Meadow Rd to McDowell St

Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)

Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)


APPENDIX #: PEDESTRIAN PROJECT LISTS Table Column Descriptions 1.

Map ID

2. Road Name 3. Segment 4. Current Funding Status Not Funded Funded: Noted as funded as a City of Asheville bond project, a City or NCDOT Resurfacing project, or a funded NCDOT project (which may also include City matching funds) Partial Funding: Overlapping funded project (noted) does not cover all of the corridor needs. Planned (MTP): This project has been identified in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) Study Complete: A corridor study* has been completed with recommendations to move forward into further study and/or project development. 5. Next Step for Project Implementation Fund Planning*: Additional planning is required to better define the scope of corridor recommendations to address overlapping land use and transportation needs. Fund Feasibility Study: Due to observed corridor constraints, additional feasibility analysis is needed to refine the project limits and details. Fund Preliminary Engineering: These projects will require preliminary engineering (30% design) to further evaluate right-of-way needs, constraints and cost. Submit for Prioritization: The next step for unfunded but planned MTP projects is prioritization through the FBRMPO and NCDOT’s SPOT process. Design, Right-of-Way, Construction: Next step for funded projects. 6. Project Description: Initial description based on preliminary project needs assessment or, if funded, the associated project scope and description. 7.

Project Pedestrian/ADA Needs: Initial assessment to identify needs related to sidewalk gaps, existing sidewalk conditions (including ADA non-compliance) and pedestrian crossings.

8. ADA Condition Scan: Results of a desktop scan of existing sidewalks along the corridor to assess ADA compliance of existing sidewalks. 1 – ADA Compliant*: 2 – Good Condition: 3 – Fair Condition: 4 – Moderate Condition: 5 – Poor Condition:

Remove from ADA Transition Plan Needs Compliance Review Needs ADA Upgrades in Spots (Specific Locations) Needs Many ADA Upgrades Needs Significant ADA Upgrades (Full Sidewalk Reconstruction for Much of the Corridor) *Note: Based on the Corridor Approach, no corridors were deemed fully compliant as full detailed ADA assessments have not been conducted as part of this process. For more on the Corridor Approach and when this assessment will be completed, see Chapter 6 of the report.



Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

19

Funded (NCDOT# U-5190) Note: Overlapping Access Management Project (NCDOT# U-5972)

Right of Way 20222023

Sidewalk (One Side) and Crossings

Sidewalk (One Side) and Crossings; ADA Compliance Review

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

1.A

Leicester Hwy

Patton Ave to Old County Home Rd

1.B

Tunnel Rd

New Haw Creek Rd to Porters Cove Rd

19

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

2.A

Patton Ave

Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd to I-240 Interchange

18

Bond Funded (Partial for Sidewalk Gaps)

Right of Way for Bond

Bond Match; 80% LAPP Funded

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

2.B

Merrimon Ave

I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd

18

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

2.C

Merrimon Ave

WT Weaver Blvd to Beaverdam Rd

Grouped

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

2.D

Fairview Rd

Swannanoa River Rd to School Rd

18

Fund Planning

Sidewalk on West Side between Swannanoa River Road and First Signal at Shopping Center. Investigate Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Needs at Old Charlotte Highway

Connection to Future Greenway; Residential Housing; Retail and Transit

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

3.A

Sweeten Creek Rd

NC 280 to City Limit

17

Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)

ROW 2024/ Construction 2027

Cross Section TBD (Likely 3 Lane w/ Pedestrian Facility OR Limited to Intersection Improvements)

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

3.B

Sweeten Creek Rd

Just south of Edgewood Rd Ext to Blue Ridge Parkway

17

Funded (NCDOT# U-2801A)

ROW 2024/ Construction 2027

Cross Section TBD (Likely 3 Lane w/ Pedestrian Facility OR Limited to Intersection Improvements)

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.C

Patton Ave

Old Haywood Rd to Johnston Blvd/ Haywood Rd

17

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project to include Bike/Ped in the MTP (Not Funded)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

3.D

Smokey Park Hwy

Sand Hill Rd to Old Haywood Rd

17

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accommodations Plan

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.E

Hendersonville Rd

Rock Hill Rd to NC 280

17

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

See Hendersonville Road Study

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

3.F

Tunnel Rd

Chunns Cove to S. Tunnel Rd

17

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommends a Sidepath (South Side) from the Tunnel to I-240; Includes Roadway and Intersection Improvements. Widen Sidewalk through the Interchange to Create a Multiuse Sidepath.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

4.A

Sweeten Creek Rd

Crayton Rd to Rock Hill Rd

16

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

4.B

Hendersonville Rd

I-40 Interchange

16

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South

Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.C

Hendersonville Rd

I-40 to Rock Hill Rd

16

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Tunnel Rd

Tunnel Rd to Chunns Cove Rd

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommends a Sidepath (South Side) from the Tunnel to I-240; Includes Roadway and Intersection Improvements. Widen Sidewalk through the Interchange to Create a Multiuse Sidepath.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

4.D

16


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

4.E

McDowell St

Entire St

5.A

Swannanoa River Rd

Bryson St to HWY 70

5.B

Sweeten Creek Rd

Brook St to Crayton Rd

5.C

Broadway St

WT Weaver Blvd to I-26 Interchange

5.D

Airport Rd

Watson Rd to I-26 Ramps

5.E

Airport Rd

5.F

Hendersonville Rd

5.G

6.A

S Tunnel Rd

Watson Rd to Hendersonville Rd

Biltmore Ave to I-40

Entire St

Total Score

Funding Status

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Scan Description

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommended the Following Under Biltmore and McDowell Greenway Connector Option B: Remove a Travel Lane on McDowell Street to Provide a Sidepath on One Side of the Street.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

ROW 2029

Roadway Widening and Modernization Project. Includes Complete Streets Elements (Sidewalks/Bike Lanes and/ or Greenway). Project to be Coordinated with Swannanoa River Greenway.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Planned (MTP)

Fund Planning

Modernize Roadway by Adding Turn Lanes; Access Management and Intersection Improvements with Complete Streets Elements.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Neighborhood Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Fund Preliminary Eng for Remainder (Construction 2022 for Section under I-26)

Partially Funded - NCDOT Pedestrian Improvements from US 19/23 Northbound Exit Ramp to North of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive). Needs Sidewalk and Crossings for Remainder of Limits.

Complete Sidewalk One Side (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

16

Study Complete

15

Funded (NCDOT# U-6046/5832)

15

Next Step

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

15

Partially Funded (NCDOT# BL-0005)

15

Planned (MTP)

Fund Preliminary Eng

Access Management Project to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

15

Bond Funded for North Side; Planned (MTP) for Remaining

North Side Construction; Submit for Prioritization for Remaining

Planned Access Management Project in MTP to include Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (Including Crossings and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

15

Fund Planning

Planning Needed to Integrate Planned Projects for Adjoining Road Sections to the North and South

Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalk; Ramp Crossing Treatments and ADA Upgrades; Consider Widening East Side for Sidepath for Overlapping Bicycle Needs

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

15

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommends Parallel Greenway along the West Side of I-240 Connecting to Tunnel Road Near Southern Mall Access. Connects to Swannanoa River Road as a Sidepath along the East Side.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

ROW 2025/ Construction 2029

Roadway Modernization Project Currently in the STIP (Likely Delayed); to include Bike/Ped Improvements.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Neighborhood Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Widening Project to include Sidewalks and Bicycle Facilities.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Future Greenway Connection); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Meadow Rd

Entire St

6.B

Sand Hill Rd

Smoky Park Hwy to Lake Dr

14

Funded (NCDOT# U-6037)

ROW 2025/ Construction 2028

6.C

Broadway St

I-240 to WT Weaver Blvd

14

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Planed Modernization Project to include a Road Diet and Pedestrian Upgrades from Chestnut Street to I-240.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

6.D

Merrimon Ave

Beaverdam Rd to Wembley Rd

14

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Road Diet with Complete Streets Elements

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Planning Needed to Evaluate Pedestrian Accommodations Plan

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (Consider Sidepath for Overlapping Planned Greenway Connection) and Widen and/or Buffer Sidewalks; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

6.E

Brevard Rd

I-240 to Stradley Mtn Rd/Ridgefield Blvd

14

14

Fund Planning


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

Fund Planning

ADA Upgrades; Improved & More Frequent Crossings (Consider Potential for Road Diet to Address Overlapping Bicycle Needs)

Complete Sidewalk Gaps Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Connections to Planned Tunnel Road Sidepath (to the East)

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

ROW 2022/ Construction 2024

Widening Project to include Sidewalk and Multiuse Path for Overlapping Planned Greenway

Sidewalks and Multiuse Path for Overlapping Planned Greenway

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

A. NCDOT# EB-5944: Complete Sidewalks and Crossings from Patton Avenue to Iona Circle. Needs Sidewalk and Crossings B. Consider Extending Sidewalk Work Past School to Estelle Park Drive.

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

ROW 2022/ Construction 2024

Roadway Modernization Project from US 25 to Weston Road. Project to include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.

Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades.

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

Fund Feasibility Study

Sidewalk and Crossings with 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments

Complete Sidewalk One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments

Next Step

ADA Condition Scan Description

7.F

College St & Tunnel Rd

Charlotte St to Beaucatcher Tunnel

13

7.G

Riverside Dr

I-26 Ramp to Broadway St

13

7.H

New Haw Creek Rd

Tunnel Rd to Arco Rd

13

Fund Preliminary Eng

Sidewalk (South Side of New Haw Creek Road)

Needs Sidewalk and Crossings

7.I

Chunns Cove Rd and Piney Mountain Rd

Tunnel Rd to Bella Vista Retirement

13

Fund Preliminary Eng

Sidewalk (West Side of Chunns Cove) and Crossing at Piney Mountain Drive

Needs Sidewalk and Crossings. Consider extending to new planned development on Piney Mountain Drive

7.J

Johnston Blvd

Patton Ave to Cedar Hill Rd

13

8.A

Swannanoa River Rd

One Way to Bryson St

12

8.B

Mills Gap Rd

Hendersonville Rd to Alpine Ridge Dr

12

8.C

Old County Home Rd

Entire St

12

8.D

Broadway St

I-26 Interchange

12

Funded (NCDOT# BL0005)

Construction 2022

Construct Pedestrian Improvements from US 19/23 Northbound Exit Ramp to North of SR 1477 (Riverside Drive)

Sidewalk or Multiuse Path on the South Side

8.E

Sardis Rd

Country Meadows Dr to Sand Hill Rd

12

Funded (NCDOT# U-6047)

ROW 2025/ Construction 2028

Roadway Modernization Project from US 19/23 to Brevard Road (NC 191). Project to Include Complete Sidewalk Both Sides and Bike Lanes.

Complete Sidewalk Both Sides with Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Consider Multiuse Sidepath to Connect Planned Greenways.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

8.F

Brevard Rd

I-240 to Haywood Rd

12

Fund Planning

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Two Sides with Transit Stops Enhancements; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.A

Southside Ave

Entire St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gaps (Both Sides) ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.B

Sand Hill Rd

Sardis Rd to Sand Hill School Rd/ W Oakview Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings. Consider Connections to Planned Greenways.

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.C

Sand Hill Rd

Sand Hill School Rd/W Oakview Rd to Wendover Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings. Consider Connections to Planned Greenways.

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.D

Sand Hill School Rd

Entire St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings. Consider Connections to Planned Greenways.

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.E

Amboy Rd

Entire St

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

ROW 2025/ Construction 2029

Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

9.F

Airport Rd

Ferncliff Park Dr to Airport Park Rd

11

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Access Management Project - Consider Sidewalk Both Sides; or Sidewalk/Sidepath Combination to Connect to 280 Sidepath in Mills River.

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

Funded (NCDOT# I-2513D)

Funded (NCDOT# EB-5944) Construction 2021

Funded (NCDOT# U-5834)


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

9.G

Rosscraggon Rd and Rathfarnham Road

Entire St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.H

Overlook Dr

Springside Rd to Hendersonville Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

Needs Sidewalk One Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.I

Rock Hill Rd

Entire St

11

Planned (MTP)

Submit for Prioritization

Modernization Project in the MTP; Not Funded Consider Le-An Hurst if Alt Alignment Necessary

Needs Sidewalk One or Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

9.J

Biltmore Ave

Thompson St to Hendersonville Rd US 25

11

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Study Recommends Widening the Sidewalk on the West Side for a Sidepath to Connect to Swannanoa River Greenway to the North and Biltmore Village Sidepath to the South.

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

9.K

All Souls Crescent

McDowell St to Hendersonville Rd

11

Study Complete

Fund Preliminary Eng

Complete Streets Recommendations - See Biltmore McDowell Study

9.L

Amboy Rd Bridge

French Broad River Bridge

11

Funded (NCDOT# U-4739)

ROW 2025/ Construction 2030

Roadway Modernization with Complete Streets (and Possible Multiuse Sidepath)

Needs Sidewalk Both Sides (or Sidepath) and Crossings.

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades


Intentionally blank to facilitate double-sided printing



Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5830)

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding

A. Improve Bike and Ped. Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

ROW 2026/Construction 2027

Sidewalk Construction

Needs Sidewalk and Crossings. Note: CoA has bond funds earmarked for housing development and negotiating with HACA. One the Planning Dept Top 5 projects to work on.

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

12

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalks (Prioritize East Side Completion) B. Improved Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Entire St

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Livingston Neighborhood

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Traffic Calming and Shorter Crossings

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

N Bear Creek Rd

Entire St

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Deaverview Neighbors and Planned Developments

Sidewalk and Crossings

3.D

Montford Ave

Entire St

12

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.E

London Rd

Entire St

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.F

Caribou Rd

Entire St

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood

Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Neighborhood Greenway Treatments

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

3.G

West Chapel Entire St Rd

Fund Feasibility Study

Sidewalk and Crossings with 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments

Complete Sidewalk One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades. Include Overlapping Neighborhood Greenway Treatments

3.H

Kenilworth Rd

Tunnel Rd to Pickwick Rd

12

Fund Preliminary Eng

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Sidewalk Extension from Aurora Dr to Beaucatcher Rd (Approx 1800 ft); Plus 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

3.I

Fairview Rd

Sweeten Creek Rd to School Rd

12

Fund Planning

A. Spot Sidewalks B. 2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

3.J

Emma Rd

Craven St/ Hazel Mill Rd to Bingham Rd

12

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Emma Neighborhood - Fund Corridor Planning Process; NOTE - NCDOT Coordination for Portion of Roadway

Complete Sidewalk Gaps One Side; Improved Crossings; ADA Upgrades; Consider Impact of Planned Parallel Greenway and Bicycle Needs

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

4.A

Shiloh Rd

Entire St

11

Fund Planning

Confirm Needs with Shiloh Neighborhood

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) One Side with Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Southside Ave to Patton Ave (Preliminary Engineering Funded) Remaining Sections Need Accessibility Funding

A. Improve Bike and Ped. Accommodations from Southside Ave to Patton Ave B. Crossings and ADA Upgrades for Remaining Corridor

Complete Sidewalk Gap(s) Both Sides (or Sidepath); Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

1.A

Lexington Ave

Entire St

15

2.A

Hilliard Ave

Entire St

14

2.B

Deaverview Rd

Pisgah View Rd to Patton Ave

14

3.A

Church St

Entire St

3.B

Livingston St

3.C

4.B

Coxe Ave

Entire St

Funded (NCDOT# EB-5965)

12

11

Partially Funded (NCDOT# EB-5831)


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Roberts St

Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext north to Traffic Cir

11

4.D

Depot St

Livingston St to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext

11

4.E

Victoria Rd

Hospital Dr to Fernihurst Dr

4.F

Victoria Rd

4.G

4.C

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

Fund Preliminary Eng

Sidewalk One Side

Sidewalk and Crossings

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Fernihurst Dr to Meadow Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Lakeshore Dr

Elkwood Ave to Shorewood Dr

11

Fund Feasibility Study

Investigate Multiuse Sidepath Connections to Beaver Lake

Sidewalk or Trail and Crossings

4.H

Murdock Ave

Entire Street

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.I

Hill St

Montford Ave to Atkinson St

11

Fund Planning

2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

4.J

Springside Rd

Entire St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Sidewalks One Side B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk One Side with ADA and Crossing Upgrades

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

4.K

Wood Ave and Cedar St

Wood Ave and Cedar St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap One Side with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

4.L

Short McDowell St

Meadow Rd to McDowell St

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades

5.G

Otis St

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.H

N French Broad Ave

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.I

S French Broad Ave

Patton Ave to Hilliard Ave

11

ADA Compliance Review A. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades Evaluate Future Bike/Ped B. Possible Additional Needs to Connect to New Connection Needs Due to I-26 Greenway (I-26 Project)

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

Roberts St

Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext north to Traffic Cir

11

Fund Preliminary Eng

Sidewalk One Side

Sidewalk and Crossings

5.K

Depot St

Livingston St to Lyman St/ Clingman Ave Ext

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.L

Victoria Rd

Hospital Dr to Fernihurst Dr

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.M

Victoria Rd

Fernihurst Dr to Meadow Rd

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.N

S French Broad Ave

Hilliard Ave to Livingston St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.O

Riverside Dr

I-240 to I-26 Ramp

12

ADA Compliance Review

N/A

Recently Constructed

2

Good Condition – Needs Compliance Review

5.J

Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)

Partially Funded (Neighborhood Greenway)


Map ID #

Road Name

Segment

Total Score

Funding Status

Next Step

Project Description

Pedestrian/ADA Needs

ADA Condition Rating (1-5)

ADA Condition Scan Description

5.P

State St

Entire St

11

ADA Compliance Review

Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.Q

Murdock Ave

Entire St

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.R

Hill St

Montford Ave to Atkinson St

11

Fund Planning

2nd Side Spot Sidewalk for Transit Connections; Crossings and ADA Upgrades

Transit Stops Connections; Improved & More Frequent Crossings; ADA Upgrades

4

Moderate Condition – Needs Many ADA Upgrades

5.S

Wood Ave and Cedar St

Wood Ave and Cedar St

11

Fund Preliminary Eng & ADA Compliance Review

A. Spot Sidewalks B. Detailed ADA and Crossings Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap One Side with Transit Stops Connections; ADA and Crossing Upgrades

3

Fair Condition – Needs Spot ADA Upgrades

5.T

Short McDowell St

Meadow Rd to McDowell St

11

Fund Spot Sidewalk ADA Compliance Revew

A. Spot Sidewalk B. Detailed ADA and Crossing Review and Upgrades

Complete Sidewalk Gap; ADA Upgrades and Improved Crossings

5

Poor Condition – Needs Significant ADA Upgrades