HomeMy WebLinkAboutLANEY WALKER/BETHLEHEM BLIGHT FINDINGS REPORT
TA~.1E OF CONTENTS
!
1.0 Introduction
1.11 Urban Redevelopment Area Defined
1.~ Previous Planning Efforts
1.~ Urban Redevelopment Act Overview
1.~ Planning Process
4
4
7
8
9
2.0 Socioeconomic Conditions
2.1 Physical Environment Inventory
2.2 Existing Land Use
2.3 Future Land Use
2.4 Public Infrastructure
2.5 Roadways
2.6 Drainage
2.7 Transit
2.8 Crime
9
17
17
32
34
38
40
43
47
3.0 Criteria for Determining Blight
3.1 Study Area Blight Factors
48
49
4.0 Conclusion
57
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 3
f " --
Map. 1_
/\ 1-
\ \ '.
I J
\
"'''''''''~
.--
.'
'"
I
j '~
/..:~
.I
i
~.-....
~ '"
r I -I
; I-
I I !.
.-- Ii..
I I i~. ,
Augusta State Unive
usiness District
'\
\
.,..-
~".
! #~,
!~'~-I
...."
--
-,,"
~.
j"~ "-~
// V
"-
'/ I ....
-'.
-.
\ .
~'",
"
/\,..
" . I
"I \ ;~';
,
/ --
"/"
l
!9m
,!
I
J
....., \
I i
a
\'..
i ...,~...
.\ I i
I
I \
I ,,-#., ~
\ - - \
\
.
Ista GA
...-
"
--\
\.
.....
J ......-"
--
-
~/opment
Pia n
"
" '\
", "
. I I
ct Map
-
.'
....
/ "
/
;
\
.'"
...'
,.-
"~~~.... ~.;
...."""
.'
I I
, '
- ." -1 Redevelopment Area Boundary
f WalkerI Bethlehem Area
al Business District
sta State University
I College
~I College Georgia
.~ ''lo''
-
.:
, -
-,
/
''1' ,-
"
\
, ,
"
.... / .,.,~4'
I
i
"
"
'\, \ ...
-.
\
'.
/
PageS
"
-.\ ,/
Page 6
National Register Historic Districts Augusta-Richmond County
Number of Resources/ Properties Dates(s) Listed in National
(Approximate) Register
500 September 5, 1985
754 December 1, 1997
Name
Laney-Walker North
Bethlehem
The significant architectural character of some properties is an advantage. However, the value of
these assets is undermined due to the disinvestments and decline represented throughout the
community. Properties have succumbed to age and poor maintenance. A lack of infrastructure
investment and connectivity to facilities and services contribute to a number of poor conditions
found in the redevelopment area.
1.2 PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS
Several assessments and studies have been conducted in order to adequately prepare for the
anticipated resurgence of residential development, economic generators and public investment
by benchmarking, outlining and proposing major revitalization efforts.
Previous planning initiatives which were evaluated as part of this blight findings report include the
Laney-Walker/Bethlehem Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Plan (June 2008), Laney-Walker/
Bethlehem Neighborhood Plan (January 2008), the Laney-Walker and Bethlehem Neighborhood
Residential and Retail Market Analysis (June 2009) and the Augusta Comprehensive Plan.
AUGUSTA-RICHMOND COUNTY TARGET AREA MASTER PLAN (January 2003)
The "Augusta-Richmond County Target Area Master Plan," conducted by EDAW/Trinity Plus One
Consultants, examined the neighborhoods of Laney Walker, Bethlehem, Turpin Hill, Harrisburg,
Academy-Baker, Central Business District, Olde Town, May Park, East Augusta, and a portion
of Uptown. The report reviewed several areas including residential revitalization, public-
private partnerships, and employment possibilities. The report defined the boundaries of each
community, provided community demographics for each, discussed current economic conditions,
and suggested key economic catalysts that would promote economic development within the
areas. The Augusta-Richmond County Target Area Master Plan report suggested that public/
private partnerships, with the Medical College of Georgia, Georgia Medical Center Authority, Paine
College, Augusta-Richmond County Housing Authority, Richmond County Board of Education, and
the State of Georgia, that could be used to ensure the success of a redevelopment strategy.
LANEY-WALKER AND BETHLEHEM NEIGHBORHOOD RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL MARKET
ANALYSIS (JUNE 2009)
"Laney-Walker and Bethlehem Neighborhood Residential and Retail Market Analysis", conducted
by RKG Associates, Inc. was prepared for the Augusta-Richmond Department of Housing &
Community Development. RKG conducted a residential and commercial market analysis to
guide future housing development activities within these target neighborhoods and provide
recommendations for strategic investments to leverage the City-County's revitalization efforts.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 7
1.4 PLANNING PROCESS
APD commenced preparation of this blight findings study in the fall of 2010. After a detailed
review of the entire area conducted through the previous studies and site visits, the study area
boundary was defined by ADP. Data assemblage and analysis occurred with resource materials
from the City of Augusta and the Augusta-Richmond County Government. This blight findings
report will be presented before the City Council in February 2010 for adoption. Once adopted the
next phase of the process includes the development of an Urban Redevelopment Plan followed
by a Public Hearing and final Approval by City Council.
The planning process and investment to renew neighborhoods in the Laney-Walker/Bethlehem
Urban Redevelopment Area will directly impact the communities' core, but also has the potential
to bring economic benefit to the greater Augusta-Richmond County.
2.0 SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS
Historically, Laney-Walker and Bethlehem have been traditional working class neighborhoods
with households of varying incomes, education and race. However, many of the original
families have vacated or relocated outside of the Urban Redevelopment Area. As a result the
age of the population within the redevelopment district is above average, with higher rates
of unemployment and greater number of incomes below the poverty level. Over time these
socioeconomic conditions have impacted the physical character of the Urban Redevelopment
Area and surrounding community.
The following is a U.S. Census snapshot of the past two decades, 2009 estimates and future
projections of the socioeconomic conditions of the Urban Redevelopment Area compared to the
City of Augusta.
The redevelopment area boundary is comprised of the following Census Tracts:
· Census Tract 700 [Block Groups 1,2,3], Census Tract 900 [Block Groups 1,2,3,4],
· Census Tract 14 [Block Groups 1, 2, 3], and Census Tract 15 [Block Groups 1, 2, 3]
Population IThe population in the City of Augusta was estimated to be 196,204 in 2009. The
redevelopment area is approximately 4% of that total with a population of 7,658. The total
population in the redevelopment area steadily declined from 1990 to 2000 (-16.4%), while the
population in the City of Augusta increased at a rate of 5%. The redevelopment area is projected
to have a slight increase in population (2.3%) while the City is projected to continue to increase at
a higher rate 5.1% from 2009 to 2014.
Population
Redevelopment Area
City of Augusta
1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
10,191 8,517 7,658 7,831
186,241 194,733 196,204 206,250
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 9
Median Age
Redevelopment Area
City
1990 Census
34.1
30.3
2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
35.4 37.3 37.5
32.4 34.6 35.4
Unemployment and Education I The high unemployment numbers correlate to a general lack of
jobs as well as the educational attainment level for most of the area. Despite the close proximity
of medical as well as government employers on the periphery of the redevelopment area the
majority of new jobs within the study area have typically been minimum wage positions. The lack
of employment opportunities within the district and a higher number of unemployed households
is directly associated with the lack of investment by business. Which is represented by the many
vacant storefronts and abandoned commercial buildings.
As the employment charts indicates unemployment increased almost 17% between 1990 and
2009. Designation of the redevelopment area will spur investment as well as offer incentives to
builders, developers, and small business owners who will provide businesses and employment
opportunities within the community.
Employment Status Redevelopment Area City
Percent Change 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014 1990 to 2000 2009 to 2014
In Labor Force -23.3% 5.4% -0.4% 5.6%
Employed -24.9% 3.8% -1.4% 4.6%
Unemployed -17.4% 5.8% 41.3% 7.8%
In Armed Forces 180.0% 120.8% -16.8% 12.9%
Not In Labor Force -15.4% 0.6% 15.6% 5.8%
Employment Status 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
Red. City Red. City Red. City Red. City
Area Area Area Area
Age 16 + Population 7,743 141,175 6,293 148,310 5,709 151,722 5,850 160,316
In Labor Force 3,267 92,663 2,505 92,253 2,192 90,134 2,311 95,171
Employed 2,750 77,841 2,065 76,740 1,791 74,459 1,859 77,864
Unemployed 516 5,490 426 7,757 377 7,723 399 8,328
In Armed Forces 5 9,319 14 7,756 24 7,952 53 8,978
Not In Labor Force 4,476 48,512 3,788 56,057 3,517 61,588 3,539 65,146
Educational 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
Red. Red. Red. Red. C'
Attainment Area City Area City Area City Ity
Area
Age 25+ Population 6,377 111,935 5,199 119,217 4,784 124,132 4,994 134,766
Grade K - 8 2,196 13,731 917 7,008 828 6,662 739 6,278
Grade 9 - 12 2,039 18,681 1,501 17,324 1,095 13,374 1,026 12,850
High School 1,232 33,357 1,500 35,029 1,690 42,057 1,848 46,537
Graduate
Some College, No 371 20,119 542 27,736 625 28,877 722 31,783
Degree
Associates Degree 70 6,312 83 7,762 118 8,082 148 9,132
Bachelor's Degree 262 13,102 238 14,566 322 16,765 361 17,785
Graduate Degree 205 6,622 72 8,004 106 8,314 150 10,400
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe Page 11
J
J
I
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
t
~
t
~
~
.
t
.
t
t
I
t
.
t
t
t
.
t
t
I
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
I
redevelopment district consists of 3,323 households out of 72,082 in the City of Augusta. Of the
3,323 HH 2000,84% earned less than the median HH income of $$33,222. The average HH income
within the redevelopment area for 2009 was $15,359.
Approximately 11% of the households in the greater Augusta-Richmond area have incomes less
than $10,000. The target census tracts and block groups have over 80% low- to moderate-income
households. Approximately 47% of the families are living below poverty level as compared to
approximately 16% in the greater Augusta-Richmond area.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 13
Page 15
Household Income 1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
Categories Red. City Red. City Red. City Red. City
Area Area Area Area
$0 - $15,000 2,870 19,874 1,885 15,891 1,312 11,237 1,023 8,737
$15,000 - $24,999 733 13,330 596 11,347 530 8,724 423 6,800
$25,000 - $34,999 298 11,632 315 10,560 275 7,824 221 6,134
$35,000 - $49,999 101 11,276 251 12,961 226 10,880 190 8,602
$50,000 - $74,999 75 7,714 167 11,658 157 12,546 148 11,242
$75,000 - $99,999 0 2,039 47 4,991 92 6,588 81 5,843
$100,000 - 0 959 42 2,860 36 5,228 39 5,399
~149,999
150,000 + 0 629 20 1,814 44 2,845 39 2,867
Total Number of 4,077 67,453 3,323 72,082 2,672 65,871 2,164 55,623
Households
1990 Census 2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
Red. City Red. City Red. City Red. C"
Area Area Area Area Ity
Median Household $8,494 $25,372 $12,670 $33,222 $15,359 $42,147 $16,115 $45,145
Income
2.1 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT INVENTORY
The neighborhoods that comprise the Urban Redevelopment Boundary were predominantly
developed prior to World War II and represent the traditional neighborhood characteristics of
homes built during that era. A majority of homes have small, irregular-shaped lots, buildings close
to or at the property line, narrow setbacks between buildings, neighborhood scale businesses,
pedestrian scale blocks with access to public transit, as well as, civic and institutional uses which
are dispersed throughout the area.
Laney Walker and Bethlehem are the two districts, which make up the Urban Redevelopment
Area. They are both identified on the National Register of Historic Districts. While their status on
the National Register of Historic Districts is an asset to the revitalization plans, a majority of the
housing supply is substandard due to abandonment, age of original housing stock, and general
neglect.
The inventory of physical conditions within this section takes into account existing & future land
use, condition of buildings, infrastructure, roadway and transportation networks, as well as the
visual character of the community in order to provide context to the evaluation of the physical
environment.
2.2 EXISTING LAND USE
The study area encompasses approximately 1,020 acres and approximately 3,300 parcels with
varying land uses inclusive of residential, industrial, commercial and recreational. Overall the
dominant land use in the study area is low-density residential (82%) with Commercial (7%)
and Public Institutions (6%) a notable second and third. Single family and duplex residence are
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 17
Active Commercial
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 19
Page 21
Twiggs Street Abandoned Commercial
Industrial Adjacent to Residential
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 23
Demolish of Residential
Vacant Land
APD Urban Planning & Mangement LLC
Page 25
~
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
~
~
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
~
~
~
~
~
I
I
~
Page 26
~
~
~
~
~
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
t
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
Good
Fair
Poor
Dilapidated
Deteriorated
Under Construction
Total
Overall Building Conditions
Number of Properties
639
385
479
343
276
35
2,157
Percentage
30%
18%
22%
16%
13%
2%
100%
This existing conditions assessment of properties is consistent with the overall decline represented
in the other evaluation criteria. While a fair portion of the properties are identified as in good
condition (639 properties) a comparison reveals that 71 percent are deteriorated and dilapidated
compared to 29 percent which are either good, fair or poor condition.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 29
t
t
t
.
t
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
t
It
.
.
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
.
t
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
Classifications for housing conditions are included below:
Deteriorated
Fair Conditions
Poor Condition
Dilapidated
Buildina Condition Cateaories
· Good: Building in sound condition
· Fair: Building requires only minor repairs such as painting and
landscaping
· Poor: Building indicating deferred maintenance requiring some
level of general repair
· Deteriorated: Building requires major repairs such as a new root
foundation, siding or windows
· Dilapidated: Building needs extensive rehabilitation and may
require demolition
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 31
~
~
~
~
~
,
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
t
,
t
,
~
.
~
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
t
t
~
t
t
Multi-Family Senior Housing
~--
Cherry Crek Crossing Public Housing
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 33
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
t
t
t
t
.
t
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Piquette Street Narrow Sidewalks and lack of curb for pedestrian crossing
There area has almost 25 miles of sidewalk within the redevelopment area. Approximately
30 percent of the roads within the redevelopment area have missing sidewalks. However, the
condition, connectivity and pedestrian level of service of these sidewalks is generally considered
to be poor.
Sidewalks
Sidewalks
No Sidewalks
Total
Linear Miles
24.6
10.37
34.97
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 35
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
.
t
t
It
t
.
t
t
It
t
.
.
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
Power Lines I Utility poles and overhead power lines are found throughout the study area. The
placement of the utility poles inhibits pedestrian movements and deteriorates the integrity of the
sidewalks. An abundance of unsightly and obtrusive power lines and substations create barriers
to new development.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 37
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
t
t
t
t
t
~
~
Deteriorated Sidewalk and Roadway
Narrow Alley and Proximity of Building to Street
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 39
Page 41
2.7 TRANSIT
The Augusta Public Transit (APT) currently operates ten fixed routes within the city. The system
is primarily radial with 8 routes terminating at the Transfer Facility at 1546 Broad Street. Service
frequency and schedules vary, but generally APT buses run from about 6:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. Eight of the routes operate on Saturday. No service is provided on Sunday.
APT also operates Paratransit services for disabled persons, in compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990.
There are five (5) Augusta Public Transit (APT) routes that serve the redevelopment area. Route
#3 runs along 5th Street and Route #4 runs from the Central Business District via 7th Street. Route
#6 connects the Central Business District via James Brown Boulevard and runs along Laney Walker
Boulevard toward the Georgia Medical Center Complex. Route #15 also provides services to the
Central Business District and the Georgia Medical Center Complex via 11th Street and connects
with Routes # 3, 4, and 6. Overall ridership data for the system shows about 830,000 riders annually
(APT, July 2008 - June 2009). The number of Households within the redevelopment area that are
without a vehicle based on 2000 Census data is 82% more than compared to the City of Augusta.
This is an indicator that a significant transit dependent population lives within the redevelopment
area. Census data projects this trend to continue.
Vehicles Available Per Household (HH)
1990 Census
Red. Area City
2000 Census 2009 Estimate 2014 Projection
Red. City Red. Area City Red. City
Area Area
0.60% 1.40% 0.80% 1.60% 0.70% 1.30%
1,563 8,888 1,161 7,346 1,004 6,707
1,213 28,645 1,057 27,920 825 24,273
547 34,548 454 30,605 335 24,643
Page 43
Average Vehicles Per
Household
o Vehicles Available
1 Vehicle Available
2+ Vehicles Available
0.60% 1.60%
2,262 8,905
1,239 24,560
667 40,159
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
t
.
.
~
.
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
~
~
I
I
Page 45
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
~
~
~
~
~
.
.
2.8 CRIME
Safety concerns within the redevelopment area are elevated due to the number of vacant
properties, declining values, and diminishing i population. Vacant homes and businesses are
attractors to illegal activities and the homel~ss. All of which are unattractive to potential
homebuyers. Previous reports noted that the~e has been some decline to reported crimes in
the area due to the investment of the City-Co~nty and local community groups. However, the
perception of safety and illicit activity continue~ to have an impact on the behavior of residents
and visitors to the redevelopment area.
There were a total of 422 crimes recorded in the crime database for the redevelopment area.
Data of criminal activity is largely concentratedl in areas of commercial activity within and along
the periphery of the redevelopment boundary.1 A crime statistics reported trespass, larceny and
drugs as the top three criminal activities in the tedevelopment area contributing over 78 percent
of total crime in the area. Crime data indicates hat out of the 422 crimes, 121 were for Criminal
Trespassing, 113 for Larceny, followed by 93 dr g crimes. The crimes that was least represented
are Arson, Aggravated Assault and Aggravated ,4.ssault with a Gun.
!
Crime Statistics Cit~ Percentage Red. Area Percentage
Drugs 931 22% 61 21%
Auto Theft 571 14% 26 9%
Larceny 11~ 27% 73 25%
Trepass 12~ 29% 82 28%
Arson 4i 1% 1 0%
,
Assault 201 5% 46 16%
Aggravated Assault wlGun 6' 1% 1 0%
Aggravated Assault wi Other 8 ! 2% 4 1%
Total 42~ 100% 294 100%
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 47
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
and wires, junk, graffiti, and litter)
h) High crime statistics
i) Higher unemployment rates than the surrounding area
j) High commercial vacancy rates (or a concentration of vacant or underutilized buildings)
k) Lower than average (per square foot) rents
I) High rental vacancy rates
m) Greater percentage of the population below the poverty level
n) Many bankruptcies and business closures
0) Substandard public infrastructure (lack of sidewalks and pedestrian amenities, lighting,
recreational facilities or open space, poor water quality or drainage)
p) Confusing, dangerous or inefficient street layout (look at accident statistics)
q) Fragmented, inappropriate or commercially nonviable subdivision platting or lot layout
r) Unclear property ownership (clouded titles) inhibiting investment in the area
5) High rate of delinquent property taxes
t) Situations in which the high land to building value makes properties economically viable
for redevelopment
3.1 STUDY AREA BLIGHT FACTORS
(d) Deteriorated or poorly maintained housing stock
Residential development is the dominant use of the study area encompassing 84% of the 1,020
acres. As summarized in the building conditions analysis, over a quarter of the structures are
in dilapidated or deteriorated condition. These conditions are such that they require significant
repair exceeding the value of the property and/or require demolition due to significant safety
concerns. The severity of deterioration described in the earlier section negatively impact long-
term sustainability and marketability and leads to the impression of abandonment, physical
deterioration and lack of investment which can ultimately present a challenge to redevelopment
in the Laney Walker/Bethlehem Redevelopment Area.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 49
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
~
~
.
~
.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(f) Visual Blight (examples might include poor quality strip commercial buildings, barren
parking lots, broken or missing sidewalks and curbs, poor drainage, garish
Commercial land use is concentrated along major thoroughfares including Laney Walker,
Walton Way, and James Brown Boulevard and concentrated along the southwest corner of
the neighborhood near Martin Luther King, Camille Street, 12th Street, and Mill Street. Visual
blight is present due to the amount of unoccupied and boarded commercial property within the
Redevelopment Area. These once thriving neighborhood service centers are now eyesores that
show lack of investment and hinder future reinvestment and do no contribute to the economic
sustainability of the area.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLe
Page 51
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
.
.
.
.
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
including benches and buffering from vehicular movements. Although new lighting is featured
as part of previous redevelopment initiatives, including along Laney Walker Boulevard, the new
decorative lamppost provides uniformed light fixtures on many of the major thoroughfares
throughout both neighborhoods. Unfortunately these amenities are not throughout the study
area. Streetscape improvements and the installation of such amenities increase the functionality
of and safety of the overall pedestrian infrastructure. The photo below depicts the existing
sidewalk infrastructure and the need for improvement and installation.
While curb and gutter exist within the Redevelopment Study Area, like sidewalks they are
inconsistent and inadequate in certain locations. Lack of drainage is prevalent and contributes to
the deterioration and functionality of the public infrastructure. This also contributes to problems
associated with standing water and periodic flooding within the Laney Walkeri Bethlehem
neighborhoods. The streets with insufficient drainage and deficiencies are illustrated on photo
below.
(p) Confusing, dangerous or inefficient street layout
The road network within the Redevelopment Area serves residential, business and regional
transportation needs. The assessment of the overall roadway functionality reveals narrow
residential roads with on-street parking that obstruct vehicular movements and compromises
the efficiency and safety of the network. The poor integrity of the road network and lack of
connectivity create substandard conditions that significantly contribute to blight in the area. The
photo on page 57 illustrates the unsatisfactory roadway conditions for vehicular movements.
APD Urban Planning & Mangement, LLC
Page 53
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
It
It
It
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
t
t
t
t
t
Page 55
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
t
t
.
t
t
.
.
-
Page 56
NOISnlJNOJ 0017
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l~ a6Dd
J77 'JUawaf5uD/III18 f5U/UUDld UDqJn Gd'r/
'pa~4~!lq se eaJ'1 ~uawdola^apa~ wa4al4~as jJa)jleM Aauel a4~ au!wJa~ap e~sn~n'1
JO A~!J a4~ ~e4~ papuawwoJaJ S! ~! 'S~U!puy. asa4~ uo pases '~JodaJ S!4~ JO eaJe ~uawdola^apaJ
a4~ U! ~4~!Iq JO S~U!puy. SpJeMO~ aJuap!^a lej,lue~sqns Ja,ijo e~sn~n'1 JO A~!J a4~ Aq pap!^oJd
e~ep Ja4~0 4~!M Ja4~a~0~ Apn~s S!4~ U! pay.j,luap! sJopeJ ~4~!Iq a4~ 'aJoWJa4~Jn:l 'uoj,leJap!suoJ
U! eaJ'1 ~uawdola^apa~ ueqJn a4~ U!4~!M ~4~!Iq a~paIMou)jJe o~ ("bas '~a 1:-t9-9E ''1'9')'0) P'1
~uawdOla^apa~ ueqJn a4~ JO spJepue~s a4~ Aq a~enbape ue4~ aJOW pue a^!sua4aJdwoJ S! uodaJ
S!4~ U! pazpewwns uOj,lewJoJu! a41 's!sAleue ~a)jJew e ~u!pnpu! A~!J a4~ Aq paJedaJd sa!pn~s
Ja4~0 pue ueld a^!sua4aJdwo) s,A~!J a4~ JO Ma!^aJ e ~sJj,lsj,le~s pap!^oJd A~!J JO Ma!^aJ e ~sAa^Jns
Pla!4spu!M pue sa!pn~s Play. ~e~ep 519 e~sn~n'1 JO A~!J JO Ma!^aJ e papnpu! )jse~ S!4~ 4s!ldwoJJe o~
paz!lj,ln A~010po4~aw a41 'eaJ'1 ~uawdola^apa~ wa4al4~as jJa)jleM Aauel a4~ U!4~!M suoj,l!PUOJ
AJo~eln~aJ pue J!wouoJa 'leJ!sA4d a4~ saqpJsap ~Joda~ S~U!PU!:1 ~4~!IS AJeu!w!laJd S!41