Loading...
Ordinance 1915COUNCIL BILL NO. 864 ORDINANCE NO. 1915 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WOODBURN 2000 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY ADDING A NEW TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT, REPEALING THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT FROM THE EXISTING PLAN, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, Comprehensive Plans are necessary for the betterment of the community and orderly growth of the City, and WHEREAS, State Law requires that cities make Comprehen- sive Plans to provide for the orderly development of such cities, and WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn by Ordinance No. 1679 adopted the Woodburn 2000 Comprehensive Plan which has been acknow- ledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan calls for periodic review and update to insure the plan meets the needs of the city, and WHEREAS, the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, Volumes I and II, was found to need updating to accomodate the future growth of the City, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that these amendments accomodate the future transportation needs of the City, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Woodburn City Council hereby adopts the amendments to the Woodburn 2000 Comprehensive Plan, Volumes I and II which are attached as Exhibit "A" to this ordinance and, by this reference, are incorporated herein. Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 864 ORDINANCE NO. 1915 Section 2. The Woodburn City Council hereby repeals the Transportation Element (pages 29-30, Vol. I, pages 179-193 Vol. II) in the existing Woodburn 2000 Comprehensive Plan. Section 3. One copy of the adopted amendments to the Woodburn 2000 Comprehensive Plan shall be filed with the City Recorder and one copy shall be available for public inspection in the Planning Department. Section 4. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor. Approved as to form: City Attorney Date APPROVED.-� ' l i am J. Co tine, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST.. "Barney {0 'Burris, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL N� 864 ORDINANCE NO. 915 April 22, 1985 April 23, 1985 April 23, 1985 April 23, 1985 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION ........................................ 1 PART I - STATEMENT OF GOALS ......................... 1 PART II - DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA ................ 2 PART III - ANALYSIS OF SERVICE AREA ................... 3 PART IV - AREA TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS .............. 5 PART V - ANALYSIS OF NEEDS .......................... 6 PART VI - CURRENT SERVICE DEFICIENCIES ............... 9 PART VII - SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ......................... 10 PART VIII- ENERGY CONSERVATION ........................ 11 PART IX - SIX YEAR TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT PLAN .......... 12 PART X - PLAN MAINTENANCE ........................... 13 APPENDIX A. SERVICE AREA/ACTIVITY AREA MAP ................... 14 B. SYSTEM ROUTE MAP ................................. 15 C. SYSTEM TIME TABLE ................................ 16 D. ADOPTION RESOLUTION .............................. 17 � r ; l,. c. • = , . .� .. � ,. 4 �.. / .. y'1 ••� y�-�b-'b_C-&�, �_ '� �J A- i. , _�:a, v-0 c a •, ., INTRODUCTION The Transit Development Program (TDP) for the City of Woodburn is the planning document that quides the development of the City's public transit service, Woodburn Transit System. It has 6Pan nrann"_.4 ;_ accordance with the "Transit Development Program Requirements" of the Oregon Department of Transportation, Public Transit Division (ODOT) and the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA). Capital Assistance Funds and Operating Assistance Funds, provided by the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978, Section 18, admini- stered by UMTA and ODOT, provide a portion of the total funds used to operate Woodburn Transit System. This document, detailing the operation, its goals, and specific needs of the community, is the written plan that is required, along with a specific percentage of local match funds, to continue to receive Section 18 Funding. In actuality, the Transit Development Program goes far beyond meeting the requirements established by ODOT and UMTA, in order to receive funding assistance to off set our Capital, Administrative, and Operational ex- penses. This document serves as a managerial tool that assists the City in establishing goals for City staff that will intergrpate various trans- portation modes, coordinate similar types of public transit programs, and pian for the next six years of public transit service within the local community. PART I - STATEMENT OF GOALS The statement of program goals, as established and updated periodically by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of Woodburn, are intended to guide the Woodburn Transit System staff in the preparation of procedures and duties necessary to implement the City's Public Transit Service. The current goals, as re -affirmed in June, 1983 are as follows: GOAL #1 -- Coordinate existing bus transit and all new develop- ments of bus transit with other modes of transportation to pro- duce a safe and efficient means to meet present and future trans- portation needs of all parts -of the community. GOAL #2 -- Provide transportation that is accessible to the trans- portationally disadvantaged that will increase the mobility of the elderly, handicapped, young, and poor. GOAL #3 -- Provide transportation that is accessible to commuters that will decrease traffic conjection, fuel consumption, and need for parking. GOAL #4 -- Provide transportation.that is accessible to school children that will increase safety and decrease traffic near schools. These goals have been implemented in varying degrees since Woodburn Transit System was created in April, 1978. As the desire from the community com- bined with the availability of funding warrents, additional program segments can be enacted to bring Woodburn Transit System closer to fulfilling each of these established goals. PART II - DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE AREA The service area for Woodburn Transit System is the Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Woodburn, Oregon. This boundary is located completely within Marion County, at the North end of the Willamette Valley, and is identified with the land deed monuments of Township 5 South, Range 1 West, and Range 2 West. Large metropolitan areas near Woodburn include Portland, 30 miles to the North, and Salem, 17 miles to the South. Smaller incorporated cities - 2 - PART III - ANALYSIS OF STUDY AREA The City of Woodburn was incorporated in 1889. Jesse Settlemier, the town's first mayor, purchased a large parcel of land to start a nursery. Part of that parcel is now Downtown Woodburn. Settlemier was successful in convincing the railroad to construct a flag station at Woodburn, giv- ing the town major status, and allowing the town to start its early his- tory around the rail transportation of passengers and goods. On January 1, 1910, the Oregon Electric Line started providing passenger service in electrically powered trolley cars from Downtown Woodburn to Downtown Portland, 13 trips daily. Early historians estimated that 1200 people gathered near the Front Street station to inaugurate this rail service that spurred new economic development in the area. Today, trans- portation is still an important part of Woodburn's history. - 4 - Early records show the town population to be 1,200 in 1893. The most recent update to the 1980 census shows Woodburn's population to be 11,355. Jesse Settlemier's early town of a few hundred acres has grown considerable. The present Urban Growth Boundary contains 3,571 acres. The following population breakdowns were derived from publications from the Bureau of Governmental Research & Service, U. of 0; and the Center of Population Research and Census, Portland State University. TOTAL POPULATION 11,355 Persons 18 and under 3,100 27.3% Persons 65 and over 3,240 28.5% Persons with a handicap 238 2.1% PERSONS WITH ETHNIC BACKGROUND A) Black 8 Less than 1% B) Hispanic 2,035 17.9% C) Asian or Pacific Islander 70 Less than 1% D) American Indian or 25 Less than 1% Alaskan Native E) Russian 3,000 26.4% PERSONS WITH INCOME BELOW 1,514 13.3% POVERTY LEVEL PART IV - AREA TRANSPORTATION PROVIDERS In January 1982, a detailed survey of local transportation providers was completed by agencies, organizations, and corporations that provide public and private transportation to Woodburn and the surrounding communities. This survey was completely updated and revised to provide the information on the following chart. - 5 - SERVICE ANNUAL % % HANDI- PROVIDER TYPE AREA CLIENTS PASSENGERS ELDERLY CAPED HOURS L • Mt.Angel M -F Angel Fixed Silverton In 1,800 100 40 11AM- Towers Route Woodburn House 2PM Mt.Angel Mt.Angel Training Fixed Silverton In M -F 8AM- Center Route Woodburn House 15,600 0 100 5PM Gervais St.Paul Marion Mt.Angel County Fixed Gervais Children 12,600 0 100 M -F 6:30AM. ESD Route Hubbard 5PM Woodburn Salem Silverton M -F Non- Fixed Mt.Angel Elderly 6,000 85 30 8AM- Profit Route Portland 4PM Housing Woodburn Volunteer Woodburn Elderly Services Demand Salem & Low 600 80 25 As (AFS -CSD) Response Portland Income Needed Woodburn Demand Woodburn M -F Childrens Response St.Paul Children 18,000 0 5 6AM- Center Gervais 5PM Hubbard Woodburn Transit Fixed Woodburn General 32,000 50 1 M -F 9AM-6PM System Route Public Saturday Woodburn Woodburn 10AM-5PM Dial -A- Demand I Portland Elderly 8,000 100 60 As Ride Response Salem Needed Woodburn Woodburn In House M -F Care Demand Salem Elderly 1,500 100 50 8AM- Center Response Portland SPM Other Providers: Greyhound Lines, Hut Airport Limosine, Dorsey Bus Inc. PART V - ANALYSIS OF NEEDS It is often difficult to determine the transportation needs of a community. Desires can be disguised to look like needs. Ideas can become needs if they are marketed well. There are some real needs for transportation that are essential. The important factor to remember is this: every individual with- in the community has some level of transportation need. If any portion of the community is excluded and cannot gain access to the transportation system, the whole community suffers, the whole community is affected. - 6 - The community can be grouped into six different segments to show a need for transit exists and how the needs differ amongwhy some members of the community fit into more than one segment, groups. (NOTE: some elderlyare also low income. 9 ent, for example, Some commuters are also young or handi- capped.) A. THE ELDERLY. Woodburn has become a popular retirement commu Many housin pity. g projects have been designed to attract Senior Citizens to the area. Recreation and social events for the elderl friendl y. Woodburn's y People, the slow pace, all create a feeling of security. Unfortunately, limited mobility often accompanies old age. While true in all cases, many of our Senior Citizens are limited not or decliningby poor health physical condition. Loss of vision, coordination, and reflexes reduce the number of elderly drivers. The need for transportation end when the physical or financial abilityto drive does, does not P Y Elderly people's needs include doctor visits, shopping and grocery needs, bankin and business needs, social visits, recreation and more. g other B. LOW INCOME. Most communities have some amount of is below Poverty . levelpeople who's income Some are unemployed or non -employable. Woodburn also has a large volume of seasonal agricultural workers and migrants. Young couples with small children, elderly on fixed incomes and students might also be included in this segment. Limited mobility is th of a lack of financial ability to own or drive a car. e result households have only one car, and some have no car. Many of these maintenance, and up keepInsurance, fuel, are costly. The transportation needs of this segment are similar to the first shopping and grocery needs, bankin and other business, social visits, recreation, to and from the lace g employment, and more. p of - 7 - C. HANDICAPPED. Physical barriers are the limiting factors to this segment. Those restricted to wheelchairs require special equipment to drive or to be transported. Some members of this segment are prevented from driving because of blindness or mental disorders. Their ability to function and survive in the community is not limited, only their mobility is. The needs of this segment include medical or doctor visits, shopping or grocery needs, to and from employment or school, banking and other business, social or recreational trips, and more. D. THE YOUNG. For an examination of this segment, it is best to divide it into three age groups: infant through age 11, age 12 through age 15, and age 16 through age 18. In the first group, transportation needs are generally limited to recreation and/or to and from school. Needs other than these are actually sub -needs of the parent's need or the family's need. (Example: it is the parent's need, not the child's when an eight year old child needs to be transported to a doctor for a checkup. This need is addressed in a different segment). In the next group, age 12 through age 15, the child is allowed more freedom and responsibility. Shopping, banking and social visits are new needs to the child. Some might be employed in part-time jobs after school. School, school acti- vities, and recreation are still needs as well. Since their age prevents them from driving, they are either dependent on others or must walk or bike to their destination. In the last group, age 16 through age 18, driving an auto is now an option, though many cannot afford the cost. Social and recreational trips, shopping, and school activities create an increased need frequency for transportation. E. COMMUTERS. For a large number of workers and college students, the daily commute is a new way of life. The daily trip, the route, and the pattern rarely change. The demand for transportation is fairly constant. - 8 - F. GENERAL PUBLIC. All of the needs listed in the five previous segments are the same as the needs of the general public, only in varying frequency. In some cases, employment requires transportation as a part of the job. This segment needs to shop and obtain groceries. Banking, recreation, curch--all these are needs of this segment. PART VI - CURRENT SERVICE DEFICIENCIES The recent addition of Saturday bus service has brought the system closer to meeting the community's total transportation needs. The service has reached an acceptable level for those who live along the route; however, some improvements to the system should be implemented to eliminate defi- ciencies that exist. Two identifiable segments of the community have major transportation needs that are not being met. Woodburn's handicapped community has experienced a difficult time taking advantage of the transportation services available to the rest of the community. All fixed facilities, including our passenger shelters, the information office (City Hall), and the telephone information service are accessible to handicapped persons. Unfortunately, both buses used by WTS are not lift -equipped and are not accessible. A limited number of trips requested by handicapped persons have been provided by Woodburn's Dial -A -Ride Program, using private automobiles operated by volunteers. Most requests from handicapped persons for local transportation are not being met by Woodburn Transit System. Similarly, when the distance between the point of origin and the nearest bus stop is greater than 3 or 4 blocks, the bus becomes non -accessible to the potential passenger. For an elderly person, the distance is usually even shorter. Several neighborhoods fit this description and are isolated from using the bus: South of Cleveland, Parr Street, East of Highway 99E, - 9 - North of Downtown on First, Second, Third, and Fifth. Woodburn's size is too large to be adequately served with one route, yet not big enough to support two fixed routes. One alternative to correct these defi- ciencies would be to coordinate a limited demand/response route with the current fixed route, using a lift equipped vehicle, and operating approximately 25 hours per week. Passengers who cannot use the regular fixed route could be provided service on the demand/response route, and our system would become equally accessible to all members of the community. Another minor deficiency exists in the current level of service. For some, the transportation needs do not fit in our hours of operation. Commuters have difficulty getting to work on time because the bus doesn't start until 9:00 AM; and the bus cannot be used to attend evening meetings or recrea- tional activities. There are many factors that keep the demand for this type of service low: traffic and parking are not a problem for local com- muters. Most elderly passengers do not like to go out after dark. This deficiency could best be corrected with a private taxi operator in Woodburn. This type of operation should be encouraged and supported as a balance in the complete transportation package for Woodburn. PART VII - SYSTEM DESCRIPTION Type of service: Fixed route, open to general public Classification: continuation of an existing service with minor modifications Service Area: Woodburn Urban Growth Boundary Major Activity Centers: See Appendix A, service area/activity areas map, page 14. Route: See Appendix B, system route map, page 15. Time table: See Appendix C, system time table, page 16. Days and Hours: Monday -Friday 9:OOAM-6:OOPM, Saturday 10:00AM-5:00PM - 10 - Annual Ridership: 32,000 (estimated FY 84-85) 50% elderly - 1% handicapped Equipment: 1 - 1981 Flxette - 23 passenger 1 - 1978 Wayne - 16 passenger Fares: Adult - 35t Children under six - Free Discount Pass - 20 rides for $6.00 Location of Passenger Shelters: Fairway Plaza Mall 99 (p North Park Plaza Downtown(proposed) Cascade Drive (proposed PART VIII - ENERGY CONSERVATION The FY 84-85 Budget for Woodburn Transit System includes $9,354.00 for fuel and oil. This amount represents 16.7% of our total operating expenditures. The effects of a major price increase or a reduction in supply would be serious and immediate, reducing our ability to provide transportation services to the community. With only two vehicles, it is impractical to stock pile a fuel supply. Our fuel is obtained from a key -lock self-service dealer located in Woodburn's Industrial Park. A shortage, similar to the shortage of the 1970's, would force us to compete with other commercial customers for our supply. If the supply of fuel to operate at a full level were not available, our hours per day and days per week could be reduced to conserve fuel. Possible route modifications could also be made to reduce the total number of miles. Woodburn Transit System has improved the monitoring of fuel per vehicle in an attempt to eliminate wasting fuel from a poorly tuned engine. Drivers have participated in workshops and driver training courses to improve driving habits and conserve fuel. Specifications for all new vehicles are prepared to include the most fuel efficient models available. These steps have helped reduce our fuel consumption. To prepare for the sudden impact, in the form of increased demand for service, Woodburn Transit System has prepared a list of available equip- ment in the community that could be leased on a shared/use basis. The list includes small buses owned by a nursing home, a church, and the local school bus operator. Several organizations have small vans that could be made available, including a child care center, a clinic, a bank, and Parks and Recreation. To help meet the needs of commuters and major employers in the area, van -pooling and car-pool matching programs could be initiated. PART IX - SIX YEAR TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT PLAN The following chart has been prepared in an attempt to identify the financial needs of Woodburn Transit System during the next six years of operation. The anticipated sources of revenue have also been identified for each year. The amounts shown for FY 84-85 are the actual budget as adopted by the City Council. Year 2 through 6 are estimated figures us- ing a 10% inflation rate. EXPENSES FY 84/85 FY 85/86 FY 86/87 FY_ 87/88 FY 88/89 FY 89/90 Capitol 8,420 800 42,500 0 1,000 0 Operating 56,004 61,475 67,600 74,400 81,800 90 000 Administrative 21,046 23,085 25,400 27,900 30,700 ' 33,800 TOTAL 85,470 85,360 135,500 102,300 113,500 123,800 REVENUES Local Sources* 56,185 62,110 76,300 75,400 83,700 90,000 Operating Income** 9,415 91700 10,200 10,900 11,800 12,800 Federal Funds 19,870 13,550 49,000: 16,000 18,000 21,000 TOTAL 85,470 85,360 135,500 102,300 113,500 123,800 *NOTE: Local sources include taxes, cash carryover, and reserves. **NOTE: Operating income includes fares, pass sales, and misc. income. - 12 - PART X - PLAN MAINTENANCE In 1980, the City of Woodburn's Transit project received Section 18 funding through Marion County, and was included in the County's Transit Development Program starting in 1981, and including each year since. The City of Woodburn has applied directly to the Oregon Department of Transportation for Section 18 funding, and has submitted an adopted Transit Development Program as required. The Transit Development Program is the official Transit Plan that is reviewed by the City Council and Mayor, and adopted by Resolution. Annually, this document is updated by the Transit Coordinator to include the most recent budget estimates available. New statistical information is gathered to update and modify the report as needed. The process for adoption by the City Council allows this report to be presented as an Agenda Item at a regular Council meeting. After review, discussion, and modification as directed, the Transit Development Program is adopted by Resolution and submitted to the Oregon Department of Transportation. L APPENDIX A. Service Area/Activity Area ! :L _ ►e 1 4 N— C e i i r S nr E v �<r�nanrw nr� 0 _ " " n0O2_Zxy ' �mgH ' u '" O OO O Z n 0 o =rZ Z~ nnG1 [ree 2 Dc C r`n, r [re =S V ► nUN r Z+e p ►► n -[y n PIO Z m [ O j�tirw 1.1 na p C N O n uy7[► r C I '� ivci Dnc n z n ►O y Is � '0 n _nC Z H ��< N I fn n O► "v ►E + . x r 0 en o r C n i yD 'ion' O/VO 0/ • ♦°♦♦ 'yi r o mob' .+ ♦� �O♦c �~ • lr Or♦I,�O i �♦� l U 0 ♦ t • o•r of r :♦ 10 11v us 1- o ♦ OZ /I + FO •u[ w crrj ► on / z Y �� � ► ^ - o [) , -.-//O , o C � . � • f T(. / 4wj n U• [r. �` y O Al n _ [ •a ► A � O 00 e p � va n ►c � f -14- rl \ \ < I \ APPENDIX B. System Route Map •r V amu- mvptN Dp D m N.o�uti— � a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 f l )t r l l i l I r ♦ry n� IF zr TInN-1N N T;nr F v - -� _ r'1<nl r'1 a fn nt ant a A,m ON n (T T p OO � T�y OO2r ' ADO"• m Z,zOr an.nt frtTy�co c r- �' H ay �nnc y�r s-• �- to \ OQ O D Ny t1 !m \ T o 2 to rn \ =D DAm y a D O_y nn < M N N D N ti r C M n MO p 0 2 m + C�n MO m u <N Z m •rrr -0.0 V _ > V yQ COIV--r♦ 0•rvf • ND .>D H D _ cl.cu.♦ coY. r.. Cly r p % C ♦ ♦♦Y1 1 rlL-A 00 ff♦YIr rrlo-'' rrr • r ~/j//// / /n ° o .•c y .• c .r DZ ' . � •.or.• � +•� lJ U i a N // �/ O wv S o I O ��� /err ` r ♦O p O'♦ //�/ Rm L` p•♦ •O• •♦ ,`\�. S ' rrr•. x H y O• 0 4 ♦cr t / co + c� •.ow • •rOOO�r ''G+1 ` Y�h °•o o f♦ro♦ II " o M r C Z y0- c, o°14 o a f o' c ♦ ♦ t. .. / cr 9 O C/ <O•Ir f cr �/ O` r ♦� /�� nut / r�♦ / A rn .ti / nx x.o o I' c f` JtN O / � r c (lcr rn oo Z - ' z �� rct ger+o1 1 /— n r rr A a / ♦ z 00 h / O / _ D O m v v ; �' N ♦+n N . la Ct / O r D D O n rn a / lf. rD•�♦ COJ•t r r• -y ti L� . n . c o o p \\ rPn OA \\ APPENDIX C. System Time Table, ¢W ICD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w¢ N N "" N N N"" �3I rn o ;4 6i 6i m F a N p p O O O O O O � ¢ 00 M 00 00 M 00 00 00 00 a v ai o c�i ci c <r 6 �U rn o rac� � ;4 c vi �r ►L6 Qi r�wrr 'Q' 3 o� o r. CV ci ►ri UpUM N N N N N N N N N w rn (5 r, 6i 'L. cn ¢W ICD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w¢ N N "" N N N"" �3I rn o ;4 6i 6i m zFYI CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Z) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p am o .-; c�i CO F¢ O O O O O O O O O �O U Q) r, rt N 6� 4 L2 F a N p p O O O O O O � ¢ O Zai o � � '+ c� lf� o —4 a v ai o c�i ci c <r 6 �U Qi r�wrr 'Q' cq o� o r. CV ci ►ri UpUM o ,-, c'i r, CV M w cn 14 C� rn rl rl ri rl r-1 rl ri w Q) O r -i epi ri GV M 4 uS U cq F o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 a 0) o r--(cq cq r, N M e ►t7 Awv zFYI CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Z) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p am o .-; c�i CO F¢ O O O O O O O O O �O U Q) r, rt N 6� 4 L2 w F a N p p O O O O O O � ¢ O Zai o � � '+ c� lf� o —4 w ¢ � ¢ in x z L? LO rt LO lf� o —4 a a '-'I coil U -J LO ml �- I "r �r "I'<r �r 0 U-) U �n ;46i m v� z z � ¢ in ►n L? LO rt LO lf� o —4 3 x 0 rn 6i C�s rr 6 a z w rn o r. CV ci ►ri UpUM a 14 rn o 4 r--( ra c�i c+s co ce cq � � �Nd' � 'aN' 4O� r--(cq '-q N co -'t Lo aU °d z �r v_ - 3 cn v I [z, c7 M M U ¢z 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 W � N N N N N N N N N a 3 o 64 ':4 6i C;� -16- 0 COUNCIL BILL No, 843 RESOLUTION No.766 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REVISED "TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM" FOR WOODBURN TRANSIT SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the Oregon Department of Transportation, Public Transit Division, requires that the "Transit Development Program" be revised, approved, and submitted annually, now therefore, THE WOODBURN CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn adopt the revised "Transit Development Program" and submit it to the Oregon Department of Transport- ation, Public Transit Division. Approved as to form:_ /9 �Attorney /p_City Date APPROVED "W— IAM COSTINE, MAYOR Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Submitted to the Office of the City Recorder ATTEST: ARNEY BURR IS, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon COUNCIL BILL No. 843 RESOLUTION N ,6 November 19, 1984 November 20, 1984 November 20, 1984 November 20, 1984 TRANSPORTATION , lit:; T r STUDY AN ASSESSMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS JANUARY ISE35 A SUPPLEMENT REPORT TO THE 1984 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM INTRODUCTION The 1984 Transit Development Program for the City of Woodburn was approved b Y the City Council on November 19, 1984. This State required document defines the Goals of Woodb System urn Transit and describes various elements of the community and our operation, including statistical information about our service area, the transportation needs of our residents, and deficiencies in our current level of service. The Transit Development Program identified two specific defi ences in our current service: ci (1) the bus route does not provide service to all neighborhoods within the service area, and handicapped community has experienced difficulties w �2) the ing to access our buses. pile attempt - The City Council requested staff to study the transportation needs of these neighborhoods and to provide natives for better meeting these needs. alter - This supplemental report provides the results of a recent survey prepared in cooperation with the Oregon Department of Transor Public Transit Division, and includes four alternatives to i ta tation, bus service in our mproving community. IDENTIFYING TRANSPORTATION NEEDS: The Survey Transportation needs are often difficult to identify, and nee between Populationds vary segments: the elderly, low income, handicapped, etc. Our success in meeting the transportation needs of these who live along our current route can be measured b examining the number of riders that are boarding the bus in each neighborhood. More expense, time, and energy is required to identify the needs of other neighborhoods. The four neighborhoods included in our survey that currently do not receive bus service are: Zone #1 - Parr Road (including Front Street and Settlemier Street), Zone #2 - South of Cleveland Street (between Ogle Street and 99E), Zone #3 - East of Highway 99E (between Lincoln and Highway 211), and Zone #4 - North of Harrison (between Front Street, Mt. Hood Avenue, and Settlemier Avenue). In addition, 3 neighborhoods along our route were surveyed for comparison: Zone A - Senior Estates (Astor Road, Sallal Road, and Umpqua Road), Zone B - West Woodburn, and Zone C - Park Avenue (between Lincoln Street and Mt. Hood Avenue). Responses from the first two questions of the survey are used to describe the household, the age breakdown and to identify indivi- duals that would be available to ride the bus. Question #3 asked the number of vehicles,aVailabie to each household, to determine if driving was an option for meeting transportation needs. Question #4 and #5 allowed the respondant to measure their own level of transportation need, and to describe how they attempt to meet the need. Question #6 asked if the bus would be used if it were avail- able (See Appendix A). 283 valid surveys were mailed to randomly selected households within the 7 identified zones, ranging from 30 to 70 questionaires per zone, depending on the size of the area. Only 14% were returned from areas not along the route, so additional responses were aquired by telephone interviews using a new list of randomly selected households within the same zone. For zones #1-4, 31% of the households contacted provided us with answers to our questions. The combined results, both by mail - 2 - and by phone, were within acceptable levels to substantiate the survey based on the total number of household in each zone. How- ever, some factors need to be taken into consideration when review- ing the responses. The surveys sent by mail required a higher degree of participation, such as adding postage and actually filling out the survey form. Additionally the survey that was mailed was only printed in english, and would have been difficult to complete by non-english reading Persons. Those with little or no interest in bus service probably would "Not Respond" rather than respond negatively. Very few house- holds refused to respond when contacted by phone, although not all households have published phone numbers. Overall, the survey results provided usable information about the transportation needs of these neighborhoods and how WTS can best meet them. ZONE #1 - PARR ROAD This area has 1.7 adults per household old enough to drive, 1.8 vehicles per household, and 9% of the households indicated that between 1 to 5 times a month, there was a need to make a local trip but no car available to make it in. {Most respondants.indi- cated they currently ride with a relative or friend when this happens). 60% of the households indicated they would be either somewhat likely (43%) or highly likely (17%) to use the bus if it were brought to their area. This zone had the lowest percent- age of unmet needs, yet it showed potential as an area that would have 000d ridership. ZONE #2 - SOUTH OF CLEVELAND STREET This is the largest area that was studied, and contains a good mix of apartments, low income single family housing, and moderate -to - upper -income single family housing. 3 - This area has 1.9 adults per household old enough to drive, 1.6 cars per household, and 22% of the households indicated that between 1 to 5 times per month, there was a need to make a local trip but no car available to make•it in. An additional 4% indicated this occurred 6 to 15 times per month. This group was evenly divided between walking, riding with a relative or friends, or postponing the trip when this happens. 66% of the households indicated they would be either somewhat.':l.ikely-(59%) or highly likely (7) to ride the bus if it came into this neiahborhood. This zone seems to have a fair amount of need, and a strong willing- ness to -use -the bus if it were available. ZONE 3 - EAST OF HIGHWAY 99E This area, located near Mall 99, has a number of low income duplexes, moderate to middle income single family housing, and manufactured housing. This area has 2.2 driving age adults per household, an average of 2 vehicles per household, and 30% of the households indicated they had a need to make a local trip when no car was available. This occurance varied from less than 5 times per month to more than 15 times per month. 41% of the households indicated they would be either somewhat likely (18%) or highly likely (23%) to use the bus if it came into this neighbor- hood 6% of the household indicated they currently use the bus when a vehicle is not available, although they have to walk to Mall 99 to get on the bus. Ridership would be good in this area if the bus route was changed to include it. - 4 - ZONE #4 - NORTH OF HARRISON This area has 2.0 adults per household of driving age, 1.7 cars per household, and 24% of the households indicated that between 1 to 5 times per month, there was a need to make a local trip, but no vehicle available to make it in. (Walking or riding with a relative or friend was the most popular way to meet this need at the present time). When asked if the bus would be used if the route was changed, and this neighborhood was added, 42% indicated they would be either somewhat likely (33%) or highly: likely (9%) to use it. The need for service to this area, com- bined with a Good showing of households that would use it, indicates ridership would be similar to most of the areas we are currently serving with the bus. We mailed 84 surveys to households along our current route, and the results provided some useful comparative information. The combined figures for the 3 zones along the route showed an average of 1.8 adults of driving age per household, and only .9 vehicles per household. When asked to rate their level of transportation need by indicating how often they wanted to make a local trip when a vehicle was not available, 35% said it happened 1 to 5 times per month, 10% said 6-15 times per month, and 16% said more than 16 times per month, for a total of 61% of the households. Of these households with needs that are not met with a personal vehicle, 53% indicated that using the bus was how their desired trip was usually made, 20% indicated they rode with a relative or friend, and 13% usually walked. - 5 - The most important indication from the survey was to determine how households along the route would be affected if service was reduced to 3 days per week to allow additional areas to be added to the route. 29% said they would be greatly inconvenienced, 19% said moderately inconvenienced and 10% said slightly inconvenienced, for a total of 58% of the households being affected by a service cut. The figures tend to indicate that the households along the route have a higher rating of transportation needs than those in the four zones being studied; nonetheless, each area showed that some transportation needs are not being met and that a potential for average to good rider- ship exists. As a result of this survey, every necessary action should be taken to add bus service to these areas. ROUTE EXPANSION ALTERNATIVES When Woodburn Transit System was started in April, 1978, the bus travelled on two 30 minute routes, alternating every 30 minutes. Only minor changes.were made to this schedule during WTS's first 11 months of operation. After thorough examination and periods of comparatively low ridership, the route was changed in March, 1979 to a single hourly route, very similar to our current route. John Shaffer, Transit Manager at the time indicated the change was neces- sary for two good reasons: new development had taken place, and the old two -route system was confusing. The new route expanded service to Senior Estates, West Woodburn, Downtown, and North Park Plaza. In 1980, minor adjustments were made along 99E. In 1982, the route was adjusted again to add Cascade Park, the North end of Senior Estates, and Gatch Street/Park Avenue. To date, each of these changes have sought to make Woodburn Transit System convenient and accessible to as many people as possible to continue to meet the - 6 - transportation needs of the community, as shown by our ridership records. The success of the service has been dependent on reli- ability, a simple, easy to use, easy -to -remember route schedule, and good marketing. Any future changes must take these factors into account if our service is to remain successful. Four alternatives have been identified that would allow the current route and schedule to be adjusted to include the areas identified as needing bus service from our recent survey. A description and cost estimation for each alternative is contained in the following section. Schedule timings and actual routes will be determined after the City Council adopts a policy for adjusting our current route. ALTERNATIVE #1 - TWO ROUTES ALTERNATING DAILY Using one bus,a schedule could be designed to operate on our cur- rent route on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, and on a different route on Monday, Wednesday and Friday that would include the four zones shown to have a need for bus service. Both routes would include major shopping areas, recreation centers, City Hall, and the Library. The major advantage of this alternative is that the new one hour route could be designed to provide thorough coverage in the neighbor- hoods where the current route is not providing service. All current passengers would continue to be serviced (at a reduced frequency). Additionally, the two route system would lay the ground work for future expansion, where by both routes could be operated at the same time as demand for additional service required, and funds were avail- able. - 7 - The most important disadvantage is a lesson that history has already taught us. The original route, started in April 1978. used two routes that alternated each 1/2 hour. Ridership did not reach the original projections developed by the Oregon Department of Transportation using this double route because it was a confusing schedule. Some of our current riders use the bus daily to get to the Open Arms Meal Site, to get to their part-time jobs, and to other daily commentments. We would loose ridership because our spontaneous riders would find themselves waiting on a corner that the bus won't come by until the follow- ing day. Our survey indicated that 58% of the households"along our route would be inconvenienced by this reduction in service. The cost of this alternative is slightly higher than our current level of service. The printed schedule would be larger and would contain an increased amount of information (two time tables). Extensive marketing would be required to keep the confusion over two routes to a minimum. The overall mileage would not change, and fare revenue would be lower initially due to lower ridership. (The new route would take time to develop regular riders). ALTERNATIVE #2 - THE BIG CIRCLE Our current route uses one hour to make a round trip. Several streets are travelled in both directions (back tracking), so that passengers can board the bus in their desired direction of travel. Approximately 18 minutes could be saved by eliminating the second stop per hour in these areas, and the new neighbor- hoods could be added. The bus would travel on a large circular route, stopping only once per hour in each area, rather than travelling in both directions on the same route. - 8 - There are several advantages to this route - all passengers currently being serviced would continue to receive daily ser- vice, at least once per hour. The areas identified in our survey would be added to the route, although not as thoroughly as with alternative #1. The schedule would remain easy to remember, and would be less confusing than alternative #1. The major disadvantage of this alternative is that the average length of time spent riding the bus will increase to one hour for all riders, even if their destination is a short distance from their point of origin. Most passengers will have to ride around the entire route before the bus will come back by their starting point. Additionally all passengers will have to wait a minimum of one hour at their destination before the bus returns. The cost of this alternative is about the same as the cost of our current level of operation. The mileage will not increase, and any reduction in ridership from neighborhoods currently served (Because of the increased riding time) will be offset by increased ridership from new riders in the four new areas. ALTERNATIVE #3 - ADD DEMAND/RESPONSE SERVICE In addition to our current hourly route using one bus, a second bus would be operated on a demand/response basis for approximately 20 hours per week, providing service to any location within our city limits. This second bus would coordinate with the current schedule, and would only carry passengers who could not use the regular bus. - 9 - The most important advantage of this type of operation is that every household would have the opportunity to request the bus to stop near by, even if the household is located at the end of a dead end street. If a lift equipped van were used as the second vehicle, our Federally Mandated Requirement to provide accessible transportation to handicapped persons (known as Section 504) would be met. The current schedule would remain convenient for those using it now. The most important disadvantage is the higher cost per passenger and the additional capital expense of acquiring a second, possibly lift equipped vehicle. As demand for the service demand/response service increased, 20 hours per week might not be enough, and passengers would have to wait a longer period of time to catch the bus. Additional time and expense would be used in answering the phone and dispatching the bus. The estimated cost to add this service in Fy 85/86 is about $14,600 above the cost of our current level of service, plus the Capital Expense to acquire or lease another vehicle. ALTERNATIVE #4 - ADD A SECOND ROUTE This alternative has been included for comparitive purposes, although Woodburn's size and population cannot adequately support two full time routes at this time. Similar to Alternative #1, two hourly routes would be operated at the same time using two buses. - 10 - The advantages of this type of operation include excellent coverage to all parts of Woodburn, easy to remember hourly schedules, and good coordination between routes. The dis- advantage of this alternative is the cost, estimated to be approximately $128,000 plus Capital Expenses to acquire an additional bus similar in size to our current buses. RECOMMENDATION Alternative #4 is not feasible because our community can not support two full time routes with adequate ridership and the costs of operation cannot be justified. At some future date, the community will undoubtedly demand this level of service. Alternative #1 is not a good choice because of the inconven- ience it would cause to our current riders, and because of the confusion it would create, similar to our original route created in 1978.. Alternative #2 meets the transportation needs of the community by bringing WTS into full compliance with Section 504 and by making the bus system accessible to all residents who contri- bute tax support to operate it. However, in light of current budget restraints and the additional costs to operate this alternative, it can not be recommended as the best choice at this time. The Transit Division Staff recommends that the City Council approve the concept of alternative #2, whereby the route would be modified to eliminate all overlapping and back tracking along the current one hour route to allow the bus to add service in the four areas identified as needing bus service in our recent survey. If so directed, the Transit Staff will prepare a timing and schedule to be brought back before City Council for final approval, with the qoal to put the new route into operation by April, 1985. - 12 - APPENDIX "A" Please circle the correct response for each of the following questions: (1) HOW MANY PERSONS IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD, INCLUDING YOURSELF, ARE IN EACH OF FOLLOWING AGE GROUPS? THE 0 16 0 1 2 3 More than 3 17 30 0 1 2 3 More than 3 31 - 55 0 1 2 3 More than 3 56 and over 0 1 2 3 More than 3 (2) HOW MANY PERSONS IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD, FOLLOWING CATEGORIES? AGE 16 AND OVER, ARE IN EACH OF THE (INCLUDING YOURSELF) Employed or attending school Homemaker/Housewife, not 0 1 2 3 More than 3 currently employed, or retired 0 1 2 3 More than 3 Other 0 1 2 3 More than 3 (3) HOW MANY VEHICLES ARE AVAILABLE TO MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? 0 1 2 3 More than 3 (4) HOW MANY TIMES PER MONTH DOES A MEMBER OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD, INCLUDING YOURSELF NEED TO MAKE A LOCAL TRIP WHEN A VELICLE IS NOT AVAILABLE? SHOPPING, DOCTOR VISIT, ETC.) (SUCH AS WORK 0 1 - 5 6 - 15 More than 15 (5) HOW IS THE TRIP MENTIONED IN QUESTION #4 USUALLY MADE? Does not apply Walk Use a bike/motorcycle/golf car Ride with a relative/friend Ride the bus Postpone the trip (6) IF THE CURRENT ROUTE WAS CHANGED AND BUS SERVICE WAS ADDED TO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD YOU OR MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD BE: Highly likely to use it Somewhat likely to use it Highly unlikely to use it PLEASE RETURN THIS SURVEY IN THE ENCLOSED, SELF ADDRESSED ENVELOPE BY JANUARY 7 1985 - 13 - APPENDIX IV f EXHIBIT "A" INTRODUCTION Footpaths and bicycle routes provide opportunities to complement present modes of transportation by linking communities, schools, parks and places of work while reducing congestion in areas and conflicts between various forms of travel occurring on some streets and highways. The establishment of bicycle and pedestrian routes will create additional commuting and recreation opportunities with- in urban, suburban and rural areas. Currently within the Woodburn area there are approximately 3,000 bicycles registered with the Police Department.; -.For a,.small com- munity this number is a good indication of interest in bicycle use as an alternative transportation mode. With increasing energy costs and an increasing awareness of physical fitness and recrea- tional opportunities afforded by bicycling, it is anticipated that bicycle use will continue to increase. PURPOSE The purpose of the area wide bicycle and pedestrian plan is to pro- vide planning guidelines and design standards for the organization of a bicycle and pedestrian system to complement the regional trans- portation network and to provide a safe, legitimate--and��*desireable alter- native system to meet the transportation and recreation needs of the community. GOAL #1 To develop an area wide bicycle and pedestrian plan. Objectives: A. To make implementation of the area wide bicycle and pedestrian plan a cooperative effort between the City of Woodburn and all other governmental juris- dictions within the area. B. To develop a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian system including both on -street and off-street routes, which make pedestrian activity and bicycle riding feasable, safe and enjoyable as alternative modes of transportation in the area. C. To provide bicycle and pedestrian routes that con- nect residential areas with the.majoricommercial,employ- ment, recreational and institutional network of the area. D. To provide connections between local bicycle and Pedestrian routes and other bicycle and pedestrian routes of a regional, state and national nature. E. To finance the bicycle and pedestrian system as much as possible with non -local funds. Where local funds are required, expenditures will be carefully programmed through the respective capital improvement programs of the various governmental jurisdictions associated with the plan. F. To insure that all new commercial, industrial, insti- tutional, residential and recreational developments consider the elements contained within the bicycle and pedestrian plan. G. To establish the administrative capability necessary to implement the area wide bicycle and pedestrian plan. GOAL #2: Increase safety and improve security for pedestrians, bicyclists and bicycle equipment. Objectives• A. Provide bicycle and pedestrian routes along Earterial and collector streets as these streets are improved, or as programmed into jurisdictional capital improvement plans. B. Establish design standards for all new bicycle and pedes- trian facilities that are consistant with state and federal design standards. C. Establish well -signed bicycle and pedestrian routes through- out the area by installing bike route signs, curb ramps and in some cases safety striping on streets and roads designated by bicycle and pedestrian use in the plan. D. Establish a bicycle and pedestrian safety plan by implement- ing an area wide educational and recreational program oriented toward teaching bicycle and pedestrian safety. E. Amend subdivision and zoning codes to require provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. GOAL #3: Increase the acceptability for bicycle and pedestrian use. Objectives: A. Provide bicycle and pedestrian routes within all state, regional and local parks and recreation areas by apply- ing for grant assistance to support the development of bicycle and pedestrian systems in parks and open space areas. B. Plan off-street routes along creeks and establish routes which lead to local and regional open space areas. Estab- lsih local loop routes which take advantage of local ameni- ties and historical areas. C. Construct pedestrian facilities, reststops, exercise loops and bicycle courses in selected areas. D. Encourage existing developments to install and construct bicycle and pedestrian facilities whenever improvements are planned. - 2 - BIKEWAY & PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM The physical environment of Woodburn and the surrounding area, being of extremely flat terrain, provides an ideal setting for bicycle and pedes- trian activities. Bicycle use has become a popular mode of transportation for a wide variety of people in the Woodburn area. The bicycle is being utilized as an inexpensive way to travel to work, school and shopping areas.as well as a means of recreation and exercise. Riding a bicycle or walking is efficient, non-polluting, energy conserving and can aid in the reduction of traffic congestion along major arterials and collectors. With- in the Woodburn area a need exists for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian system. Existing System At present, Woodburn has limited bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Though I-5, Hwy. 214 and 99E are considered part of the State Bike- way System, existing facilities along these routes consist of a signed and striped bike lane along Hwy. 214 between Boones Ferry Road and 99E. A signed and striped bike lane exists along the South side of West Hayes Street between Settlemier Avenue and Nellie Muir Elementary School. An unsigned but striped area exists along the Front Street overpass between St. Lukes Cemetary and the Woodburn High School access road. Though these are limited facilities, their existance has a direct influence on the location of future facilities. Locational Criteria In the process of determining locations for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, a variety of criteria were taken into consideration. Potential use, street width and right-of-way, continuity and dir- ectness, safety, accessability to schools, parks, commercial areas and connections to existing facilities, were of primary consider- ation. Also considered were pavement quality, traffic flow, use conflicts, cost, physical barriers and attractiveness. Bicycle use generally falls into two catagories: utilitarian and recreational. Utilitarian bicyclists usually have a specific destination in mind such as workplace, school, home or store. Recreational bicyclists may be concerned about the aesthetic qualities and exercise potential of a facility rather than specific destination. An attempt was made to incorporate the needs of both types of bicyclists within the bi- cycle route plan. Recommended Bicycle Routes Using the locational criteria listed above, the following streets have been analyzed as to their potential use as bike routes: Ever- green Road, West Hayes Street, Settlemier Avenue, Boones Ferry Road, Harrison Street, Fifth Street, Third Street, Lincoln Street, Young Street, Park Avenue,.Gatch Street, Front Street, First Street, Garfield Street, Willow Avenue, Woodland Avenue, Cleveland'Street and Brown Street. - 3 - C At present, the following streets could accommodate bicycles with minor improvements, such as signage, striping, drainage grate alignment and where necessary removal of on -street parking: West Hayes Street, Settlemier Avenue, Evergreen Road, Young Street, Gatch Street, Third Street, Garfield Street, First Street, Willow Avenue, Woodland Avenue and Lincoln Street. Any future capital improvements of these streets should take bicycle facilities into consideration. Streets needing major improvements such as rebuilding, resurfacing, widening, shoulder work or drainage installation are Boones Ferry Road, Front Street (North and South of the downtown area), Fifth Street, the North side of West Hayes between Leisure Street and Nellie Muir School, Cleveland Street and Brown Street. Any capital improvements on these streets should include bicycle facilities. Future expansion of the street system i.e. Country Club Road, (Boones Ferry Road to Front Street), Evergreen Road and Parr Road will provide the opportunity to expand bicycle routes to make connections with new development areas. These roads should incorporate bicycle facilities. In addition to the proposed on street bicycle routes, an off street bicycle and pedestrian trail system along the Mill Creek flood plain has been given some consideration in the past. Mill Creek is a very small stream with a flood plain of about 200' in width. A trail system along this stream and a tributary would provide a scenic con- nection to six city parks and a school. Another area for consider- ation as a bike and pedestrian path would be along the Senecal Creek flood plain in West Woodburn. Both of these off street systems would connect into the on street routes to tie together residential areas, schools, parks, commercial and employment centers of the area. Please refer to bikeways map for route specifics. Design Standards Construction of new bikeway facilities routes should result in a system that i cyclists. This can be accomplished by standards as explained in the American and Transportation Officials "Guide for Facilities". These standards, as well markings and signals established in the Control Devices", have been adopted by portation as well as federal agencies. Policy #1 or improvements on existing s safe and useable by bi- adoption of minimum design Association of State Highway Development of New Bicycle as design standards for signs, "Manual on Uniform Traffic the Oregon Department of Trans - All new bikeway facilities in the Woodburn area shall be constructed in accordance with design standards as established in American Associ- ation of State Highway and Transportation Officials, "Guide for Develop- ment of New Bicycle Facilities". Policy #2 All bikeways shall be signed in accordance with the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" to provide guidance to both bicyclist and motorist. - 4 - C BICYCLE SAFETY Available data on bicycle accidents is limited due to the fact that most accidents are minor and are not officially recorded. Only 10 percent of all bicycle accidents involve motor vehicles. However, nearly all bicycle fatalities involve accidents between motor vehicles and bicycles. In- creasing safety and security for bicyclists and reducing bicycle accidents can be achieved by three complementary methods: Improving physical bicycle facilities; implementing an educational program for both bicyclists and motorist and providing consistant enforcement of traffic regulations. Physical Facilities Bicycle facilities can be improved for safety by applying appropriate design standards. Within Woodburn an existing bike lane along the South side of West Hayes Street between Settlemier Avenue and -Nellie Muir Elementary School has been designed to accommodate two way bicycle traffic. This type of design should be discouraged for all future bi- cycle facilities as it has been found to be a major cause of bicy0 e. - motor vehicle accidents. Because this design causes riders to ride against traffic, it does not comply with Oregon (URS 483-487) motor vehicle laws that state "...every person riding a bicycle upon a road- way is subject to the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by the laws of Oregon ...". Other areas of concern regarding bicycle safety and design of facili- ties are on -street motor vehicle parking, intersection conflicts and other hazards such as drainage grates, manhole covers and rough pave- ment. On street parking poses problems of cars pulling out into the traffic stream and opening of car doors into the path of bicyclists. Removal of on street parking or an alternative such as phased parking (i.e. no parking during school opening and closing or during daylight hours), along designated bike routes would help eliminate these pro- blems. Safe movement of bicycles through intersections could be accom- plished by appropriate facilities such as signs, markings and signali- zation which serve to warn motorists of the potential for bicycle/auto conflict. Drainage grates and manhole covers should be modified or replaced so as not to cause a hazard to bicyclists. Smooth riding surfaces can be provided through routine resurfacing and sweeping of street and shoulder areas. Policy 3: Routine street maintenance shall include the provision of smooth paved shoulder areas and sidewalks and the replacement or modification of drainage grates and manhole covers so as not to cause a hazard to bi- cyclists and pedestrians. Education Education of the bicyclist, motorist and law enforcement officials can have a direct influence on the reduction of bicycle accidents. The majority of bicyclists are in the age group of 6 - 20 yrs. old. This age group is also the most frequently involved in accidents. Education programs aimed at this age group could be incorporated into local school district curriculums. Recreational bicycle programs can also serve to educate bicyclists about safety and abiding by the rules of the road. - 5 - Enforcement An effective law enforcement policy can play a significant role in bicycle safety and education. Policies that encour- age bicyclists to ride on sidewalks or against traffic as in two-way bike ways may cause riders to assume that traffic laws and regulations don't apply to them. The bicyclist needs to know that he must obey the same traffic regulations as any other user of the roadway. Most violation problems involving bicyclists consist of failure to yield right-of-way, running stop signs and signals, riding without lights at night and riding against traffic. Motorists violations consist primarily of failure to yield right-of-way or an improper turn. Motorists as well as bicyclists need to be made aware of the accident potential of violating rules and regulations. Lack of enforce- ment leads to disregard, therefore, it is important that the local police authority follow a consistant enforcement program. Policy 4 - The City shall encourage ongoing educational and recreational Programs related to the safe and legal operation of bicycles. IMPLEMENTATION Implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan involves changes in existing policies, locating and acquiring funds and providing for review of the plan as transportation issues evolve. Policy Changes An inventory of existing bikeway facilities has revealed certain Policies which are not consistant with present safety design stand- ards. Changes in these policies along with additions to current ordinances regarding subdivisions and zoning, will provide for an orderly expansion of the bikeway system. The use of sidewalks as bikepaths and two-way bike lanes on one side of the road should be discouraged in future policy making. Policy 5: Where feasible, designated bike lanes on both sides of the street should be provided through the removal of parking or phased park- ing to permit bicycles to travel on roadways and'i►'the same dir- ection as motor vehicles"as_,required by Oregon Law. Code Revisions Currently Woodburn subdivision and zoning codes contain no pro- vision for bicycle facilities. Many elements of the street system are included in a subdivision plan by the developer. The sub- sequent costs of these facilities is eventually paid for by the consumer of lots and homes in these subdivisions. Without this system, taxpayers from throughout the community would be faced with a much greater tax burden to support growth. This is the situation with bicycle facility construction in the development of new areas, where nearly all funding for projects comes from tax sources from the general public. - 6 - Currently zoning ordinances of the City of Woodburn make no provision for parking of bicycles. Secure, safe and convenient bicycle parking will become a necessity as bicycle use increases. Policy 6: An amendment to the subdivision ordinance should require as part of the street improvement plan that bicycle facilities be included where the subdivision encompasses or abuts an arterial or collector street. The zoning ordinance should be amended to require bicycle parking facili- ties and spaces at all schools, parks, commercial centers and public use facilities. Funding Sources: Funding for bicycle programs can come from federal, state and local sources. Each of these sources alone will not provide all the neces- sary funds, but taken together, they can enable the Woodburn area to provide a bikeway system as well as safety and educational programs. Federal funds through the Federal Highway Act of 1976 can be used for the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in conjunction with hgihway projects, and within limits, for the construction of independent bikeway facilities. Other federal sources of funds are available through the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund, Com- munity Development Block Grants (Department of Housing and Urban Dev- elopment), US Army Corps of Engineers, Recreation Facility Loans (Dept. of Agriculture), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, Department of Energy and Revenue Sharing funds by the United States Treasury Dept. In 1971 the Oregon Legislative Assembly enacted House Bill 1700. This bill required that 1% of all monies received from State Highway funds be used for establishing bikeways and footpaths along streets, roads and highways as well as in parks and recreational areas. In May of 1980 an amendment was passed by the voters of Oregon which restricts the use of all hgihway funds to highway purposes. The bicycle fund can no longer be spent on bikeways and paths in parks or anywhere outside of highway, road or street right-of-way. Local governments are allowed the accumu- lation of these 1% bicycle funds over a period of ten years. The monies could be used to match Federal Funds. Local funds can come from a number of sources. The General Fund of a community is very flexible and is subject to community preferences. Policy makers can be influenced by strong support of bikeways. Parks and Recreation agencies may provide funds for facilities that are in conjunction with other phases of park development. Community colleges and schools can fund and construct bikeway facilities through campus improvement programs. Cities, counties and states can also sell and issue general fund bonds for construction of bikeways. Right-of-way donations by landowners for the purpose of bikeway accommodation, are entitled to Federal and State tax deductions. - 7 - Another possible source of funds would be through the implement- ation of a bicycle registration program. This would provide funds for facilities and programs as well as reduce bicycle thefts. Policy 8. When monies become available through the various sources, the City and other involved jurisdictions shall take actions to acquire these funds for continual improvement and development of bikeway and pedes- trian facilities. Plan Monitoring A review of the plan should be conducted on an: annual basis or as needed to assess new projects, changing community attitudes, exist- ing facilities, related transportation issues, locational problems and availability of monies. Bikeway projects should be included in street Capital Improvement Programs regardless of funding source. As funds become available, decisions on construction of these pro- jects can be made by local policy makers. - 8 - i u N 11 9L fD "S a N S (D (D J c+ -1 (D `' a � t to O p N c+ 'S C+ N c+ J A 11 C+ N (Do _, m. (D < o N -1 CD m C+ v 7r < (D p E = y N '� = y N ' : m i lD p n� N ID C+ (D � . (D -S < Com+ O N C+ n ( a D (D C+ a < C+ C-) 'Sp cF mc+ _ (D _' �• � � � N Z N �1 � Ti S N ( a D ko 10 C+ a n C+ C-) 'Sp cF mc+ _ n O O Q y O O 0 C+ p (D A co Ntir S4'' O D C+ O tD (0 O O C+ C+0 OO o rn O O 00 C C+ C+ y y o C+l NpE :3 O 0 S TS � ..,s C+=3 .J S y Z tC C O a O C+ fD a W O y (D (D C+ J. C/1 O J• J. J. J. co J. W J. W Cr W co Co -+ W77 W co (A pIr 7C C+ ,a r+ M r -r (D 77' 7C' ((D (D O =rf 0) (D (D (D J.C CD El CD(D (D X JW 771(D O O 0 0 a -S 'T . J EN C C C O O a (D (D N) C cC+C C (D C y C C d O "S m (D (D (CD ((DD C+ C+ C+ C+ a. O to y O O C S y (A. y y y 0. n z :(DJ. �• y y N (L] (p (D Cl+ 771 cn y yVpl • Ra '0 f2o N aCD :p p Ln "T F Cl j+ O C> f n p _ -y (n C+ y C+ y S K (D Vf < C a- a C+ S C+ C) J. O �' O O Q C+ C+ 7C _. p J. -S J. �, a (D (D Z p I d C1 i (D a ..moi d (D N =3 0-1 tr O C+ CLCD p a (D Ulm 1 (D � (n 1 A z o a n no v O -s o p 00 =3 oQ) aw a(<D .o 0� n< 0< fa (D v o a (D (D to << < < J. y a fn E3 J. C+ (D .J• A �. J• (D El O ( a w . C* J. J. � � N C+ N CC+ 3 C+ _. N m ct m to N (D a5 W a cC+ 'CD {S n C+ x- a -5 -j a N A i p (D p O O -'• 7r (D < -' _N N CN CD (D lD (� CD (0(n s a a y (D o C+ :5 Q. o Q. C+ f 'L7 a y O (D (D 'T S CQ O c< p p B o O ,- p (A y a aC+ N N 23 o ca cn ^OS a < T -z (D 77 F f CL J. o a � In C-. a LO y O V. to N N O :3 1 A to s I N 1 v m w c-) :E:v o w < _% J _J. p ;aC (D ,t -S � < 0 O N C+ a c. :3(D o ^f Z7 -1 J i w m C7 c+ A O O (D (A w � —( _ 0) w (D c+ -) a w t7 cr C CL_% CL < C (D (D Z7 (D (/) :3< CL X (D a n- c+ C+ C (D -{� J N (D a O :3 N (D N c+ N S (� O w S=3 ci- 0 O 0- c+ —� O =- • c+ (D s -TI mmmmcvc->-n g r� r r TJ N O X Z w X x -'S 'T O O c+N c+=c+w (D o —+ m b� 4 ws a o :3 (D c+ (D w (D O. < d 4�- zz3 G7 C7 � N �; c+ :3= --� (D c+ V)0� o N (A l< C+ w to 0M: O O O O Cl = t0 c+ :3 CL .. n n O (-D (.0 O (D c+ (D m m N (A c+ 9.0 p J O c+ = c+ w 0 'O • O m p C =- N • N C w (D C+ f+ N (D C-+ O" c'+ S O (20 X7 (D "S (1 (D no (D w J •I V %� O -' C+ W W N CJ m X: J. J. !D O to 0- J• �J J. =r .J. S J. 7r 7C"M 717 77 (D 7C (D x* J• 7C U (D (D� .7 (D !D :3(D � (D' (D C O � a 0 -0 CD m `S O (D Cu cc+0 (D (D O _< C (D C "S C N N (D f'+ < C+ (D c+ C r+ 3 m d. w �.0 (U J N (D (D (D (D (D (D z O N N N w N N C+ N .J. :3J. J J J. S N `T c+ S C (D N (D (D N 17 O (20 Qo -a < w (D < -h -1 N y C 0 Ocx ". (D f't _ < 0 C+ J• (D O ::3(D CL w n�i =- w a o : o (D CD- C n. -r, -s N N r (D 1. O 0 '3 C 0 —' i O • } 3 N c w w o O c+ c+ c.., c_. 3 (D -s w m 0 (D (D v z J J. C+ W-0 w i i -S —+ CL O _10 O (D w< < =30 � (D: (D o- 3 B n S O (D (D 'S -.0m:30 (D c+ c+ < O x N (D CL C+ '� ' El 3 w (D "S (D :3O :j(D C_+ N C+ 0 m TJ a o a (n l< B C+ -i, 0 0 BIKEWAY & PEDESTRIAN PLAN IMPLEMENTATION COSTS TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: $ 15,253.00 Administrative Costs .......................... $ 1,500.00 Signage (including sign, post and labor) ...... $ 4,362.00 Striping and Pavement Markings ................ $ 300.00 Construction of 6 x 200' bikepath connecting Hwy. 214 and 5th Street .............. $ 2,000.00 Curb Ramp Construction 10 @ $450.00 each ...... $ 4,500.00 Bike Racks (two) .............................. $ 400.00 TOTAL: $ 13,062.00 Funds left over can be credited to a financial reserve to be held for not more than 10 years. BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PLAN DEFINtrrnNO, BICYCLE - A vehicle having two tandem wheels, propelled solely by human power, upon which any person or persons may ride. BICYCLE FACILITIES - A general term denoting improvements and pro- visions made by public and private agencies to accommodate or en- courage bicycling, including parking facilities, maps, all bikeways, and shared roadways not specifically designated for bicycle use. BICYCLE LANE (BIKE LANE) - A portion of a roadway which has been designated by striping, signing and pavement markings for the pre- ferential or exclusive use of bicycles. BICYCLE PATH (BIKE PATH) - A bikeway physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier and either within the highway right-of-way or within an independent right-of-way. BICYCLE ROUTE (BIKE ROUTE) - A segment of a system of bikeways design- ated by the jurisdiction having authority with appropriate directional and informational markers, with or without a specific bicycle route number. BIKEWAY - Any road, path, or way which in some manner is specifically designated as being open to bicycle travel, regardless of whether such facilities are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles or are to be shared with other transportation modes. HIGHWAY - A general term denoting a public way of purposes of vehicular travel, including the entire area within the right-of-way. RIGHT-OF-WAY - A general term denoting land, property, or interest there- in, usually in a strip, acquired for or devoted to transportation purposes. RIGHT OF WAY - The right of one vehicle or pedestrian to proceed in a law- ful manner in preference to another vehicle or pedestrian. ROADWAY - The portion of the highway, including shoulders, for vehicle use. SHARED ROADWAY - Any roadway upon which a bicycle lane is not designated and which may be legally used by bicycles regardless of whether such facility is specifically designated as a bikeway. SIDEWALK - The portion of a highway, street or roadway designed for pre- ferential or exclusive use by pedestrians. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES - A general term denoting improvements and provisions made by public or private agencies to accommodate pedestrians, including sidewalks, curbramps, signage, pavement markings, footpaths, benches and water fountains. CITY OF WOODBURN E,XHIBIT 'A TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION - Purpose Statement .......................... 1 II. GOALS & OBJECTIVES ......................................... 2 III. GROWTH, LAND USE PATTERNS & IMPACTS Growth Projections & Land Use Patterns ................ 4 Impact of Increased Growth ............................ 5 Impact of Proposed Plan on Projected Growth ........... 5 IV. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS A. STREETS & HIGHWAYS Inventory of Existing Street System ............... 6 Functional Classifications ........................ 7 Street & Highway Improvement Programs .............. 9 Street System Expansion ........................... 10 B. TRAFFIC & PARKING PATTERNS Traffic Volumes & Projections ..................... 12 Capacity & Level of Service ....................... 21 Traffic Control Inventory ......................... 23 Access Control ..................................... 24 Traffic Accidents ................................. 27 Parking Inventory ................................. 30 C. RAIL & AIRPORT FACILITIES ............................. 31 D. TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ....................... See Appendix III E. BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PLAN ....................... See Appendix IV V. LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION ISSUES I-5 Interchange Development .......................... 33 Energy Availability .................................. 36 VI. FUNDING SOURCES ........................................... 37 VII. PLAN EVALUATION & AMENDMENT PROCEDURES .................... 38 VIII. POLICY STATEMENTS ......................................... 39 IX. APPENDICES - I, II, III, IV LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I - FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS ......................... 8 II - AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC - MINOR ARTERIALS & COLLECTORS 16 III - AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC - STATE HIGHWAYS ............. 17 IV - SERVICE LEVELS FOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS ............... 22 V - SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION INVENTORY .................. 26 VI - MOST FREQUENT ACCIDENT INTERSECTIONS ............... 29 LIST OF DIAGRAMS DIAGRAMS PAGE I - TURNING MOVEMENTS: HWY.99E/HWY.214/HWY.211 18 II - TURNING MOVEMENTS: HWY.99E/HARDCASTLE .............. 19 III - TURNING MOVEMENTS: HWY.214/SETTLEMIER/BOONES FERRY . 20 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDICE PAGE I - INVENTORY OF STREET SYSTEM ......................... 1 - 7 II - PARKING INVENTORY .................................. 1 - 7 III - TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ................. 1 - 29 IV - BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PLAN .......................... 1 - 13 MAPS MAPS PAGE I - NEW ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR STREETS ................. 1" = 800' II - SIGNAL INVENTORY ................................... 25 INTRODUCTION The previous Transportation Plan for the City of Woodburn was preparec in 1977 and has had no further review or update since that time. In the time since that plan was adopted transportation conditions have changed and it has become necessary for the preparation of a more com- plete analysis of transportation issues. The Land Conservation and Development Commission requires that Transportation Plans be revised in accordance with local and regional Comprehensive Plans. The Com- prehensive Plan for the City was revised in 1982, though the Trans- portation element was not revised or updated at that time. PURPOSE STATEMENT The purpose of the Transportation Plan revision is to analyze trends and identify those facilities and improvements needed to move people and goods in an effecient and effective manner under projected year 2000 developmental and traffic conditions. This revision is intended to provide guidelines for the community for the development of a long range transportation strategy for the Woodburn area. However, this plan is not expected to be the final transportation strategy for the next fifteen years. The intention is that the analysis and recommend- ations contained in the Plan will be reviewed on a biennial basis to ensure that they remain consistent with projected traffic flows, com- munity development desires and funding availability. It is intended that a major re-evaluation of the Plan will occur every ten years and a somewhat less detailed analysis of the Plan will occur every five years. ... ........... d GOALS & OBJECTIVES - TRANSPORTATION PLAN GOAL I Establish a framework for the development of facilities to move persons and goods in as safe, effective and efficient a manner as possible under projected year 2000 traffic conditions. Objective A Develop a transportation system that interconnects residential areas with employment centers, commercial areas, schools, parks, churches and regional transportation networks. Objective B Develop a street system wherein arterial streets are of suffi- cient width to accommodate traffic flows without interruption. Collector streets should function to conduct traffic between arterial streets and local streets, which serve to accommodate movement within neighborhoods. Objective C To insure that state and federal highways with routes through the City are improved in accordance with projected traffic volumes and the elements contained within this plan. Objective D Develop a public transit system which will provide service and facilities to improve the mobility and accessability of the transportation disadvantaged. GOAL II Develop a transportation system that avoids or reduces a reliance upon any one form of transportation. Objective A Encourage the development of transit services by route expansion, increasing levels of service and appropriate street design to faci- litate movement of transit vehicles. Objective B Develop a bikeway and pedestrian system which will provide routes connecting residential areas to schools, parks, places of employment and commercial areas. Ojbective C Promote optimum effeciency within the transportation system by the use of traffic management techniques including access controls on major arterials and the utilization of available transit system capacity prior to the construction of major new transportation facilities. 2 Objective D Encourage the design and development of transportation facilities that can be readily modified to accommodate future demands. GOAL III To provide adequate levels of mobility with a minimum of energy consumption and environmental, social, aesthetic and economic impacts. Objective A Encourage the use and development of transportation modes which are the least energy consuming for the movement of people and goods. Objective B Provide a level of transportation services to the urban area that are compatible with the environmental, economic and social objectives of the community. 3 \�\ ��\ \ -c" - �� �� /�\ i . © ^° � \ \ - - : . : : y. y ; a - - < , � w y . . , , « . » : � « \ � - « � � � « s � \ � \ � � * � y d �� � / � - ,xv . r y .� ai : « y : , _ » / � : � « a / . ,y> \�\ ©t y^ m© « \ - �� �\i:�© � y � \ \ GROWTH, LAND USE PATTERNS GROWTH PROJECTIONS & LAND USE PATTERNS Population projections for the City of Woodburn have been analyzed in Section V, Chapter 7, Page 16 of the Comprehensive Plan Volume I. Cur- rently (as of September 1984), Woodburn has a population of approximately 11,355. This is an approximate.8% change from a 1980 population of 11,175. In the year 2000 it is estimated that Woodburn will have a popu- lation of 23,000. This forecast was adopted by the City from the 208 Waste Water Study developed by the Mid -Willamette Valley Council of Governments in 1978. During the late 60's and early 70's, Woodburn experienced a rapid rate of growth due in large part to the development of Senior Estates. Though the growth rate has leveled off in recent years,it is anticipated that with development of available industrial and commercial lands, new employment opportunities will be realized and Woodburn will continue to experience a steady rate of growth. Patterns of economic activity and development trends for the City of Woodburn are discussed in the Economic Plan included in Volume II of the Comprehensive Plan. Development patterns within Woodburn are indicated by the Comprehensive Plan. Much of the plan was based on the existing transportation system consisting of State Highways 99E, 214, 211 and Interstate 5 as well as the local arterial system. Agriculature and food processing will continue to be the primary base of the economy for Woodburn. Though with increased mechanization this industry may realize a decline in -.employment requirements. Since the establishment of the Industrial Park a variety of light manu- facturing firms have located in Woodburn. Recent annexations of indus- trial lands to the City indicate that the City is willing to accommodate industry in order to provide diversity and stability to the economy. In the commercial sector, Woodburn exhibits a fairly steady rate of growth. Though there are an abundance of retail trade establishments which supply basic goods and services,.retail spending for clothing; applicances and entertainment is spent primarily in Salem or Portland. As the demand for these goods and services increases there is currently available a variety of commercial lands to accommodate this demand. If development patterns proceed as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan it can be assumed that the present transportation system will be utilized to accommodate new development. With increased development and sub- sequent increases in traffic volumes and public demand for transportation facilities, the present system will require an analysis of needed improve- ments, expansions, alternatives and possible impacts associated with transportation system development. 0 IMPACT OF INCREASED GROWTH Community growth projections for Woodburn indicate an approximate doubling of the present population by the year 2000. The impacts of this growth on the level of mobility desired by the community will be greatly influenced by the condition of the transportation system. For assessment purposes the impacts on mobility can be assumed to occur with the committed transportation system, i.e. the currently existing highway, street and transit systems and any routine maintenance and construction program obligated for funding as of 1984. With increased traffic volumes on streets and highways a number of impacts should be considered. From an engineering stand point streets and highways are designed to accommodate an anticipated level of service. When traffic volumes exceed the carrying capa- city of streets and highways, deterioration, in the form of unaccept- able levels of congestion and erosion of the road bed itself, begin to occur. These impediments to movement impact the mobility as well as the safety and welfare of the road user. The impacts of increased growth on the committed transit system would include over crowded buses, slower travel times and a lack of route expansion which would result in a large portion of the population not being served. Congested conditions expected on the committed highway, street and transit facilities will have significant impacts on the mobility of residents in the City as well as travelers through the City. Access to jobs, schools and shopping areas can be expected to decline. The committed transportation system would be unable to provide the highway and transit capacity necessary to adequately serve the land use and development patterns as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. A lack of transportation investment will not in all actuality result in the congestion levels outlined above because the limitations of the com- mitted transportation system will not allow the levels of residential and economic development called for in the Comprehensive Plan. There- fore, travel volumes would not reach the proportions portrayed. IMPACT OF PROPOSED PLAN ON PROJECTED GROWTH The proposed transportation system improvements will accommodate projected population growth and development as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The ability of the area to fully realize potential economic opportunities will depend in large part on the degree and convenience of access provided by the transport- ation system. The improvement and expansion of the existing system will enhance the overall transportation network of the area while providing significantly greater accessiblity to developable lands. Consequently, the community should become even more attractive to people, businesses and industries. fC�l EXISTING SYSTEM An integral part of the transportation planning process is an inventory and anaylsis of the existing street and highway system. Currently there are 189 streets, three State Highways and one Federal Highway consisting of approximately 55 miles of roadways within the study area. Nearly all these streets and highways are constructed of bituminous concrete or a bituminous concrete overlay. The inventory in Appendix I shows approxi- mately 45 percent of the streets do not meet the minimum street design standard pavement width of 34 feet, 12 percent have sections of poor or very poor pavement, 25 percent have none or only portions of storm sewer, 73 percent are without sidewalks (17 percent of this is in Senior Estates) and 11 percent are unimproved (i.e. gravel or dirt surfaces only). The State Highway Division published the State Highway System Preservation Report in January of 1983 within this report pavement conditions are placed in five categories ranging from very good to very poor. For purposes of consistency, these categories have been used in the inventory of Woodburn streets and roads. The description of these categories are: 1) Very Good - Most roadways constructed or resurfaced during the last year or so along with other exceptional sections. 2) Good - Pavement may be beginning to show evidence of slight surface deterioration such as minor cracks, spalling and rutting but still gives a first class ride. 3) Fair - These pavements exhibit faulting, cracking, rutting and may have a few joint failures. Ride qualities are somewhat inferior to those of new roadways. These pavements are in a stage of service life when the routine maintenance program is most effective. 4) Poor - Roadways that have deteriorated to such an extent that they are in need of complete resurfacing. 5) Very Poor - Roadways in this category are in an extremely deterior- ated condition and may need complete reconstruction. Approximately 14 miles of the existing street system are in a state of deterioration. The criteria used to determine this condition were: 1) Unpaved surface. 2) Poor or very poor pavement condition. 3) Inadequate storm drainage. n. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS The functional classification of streets and highways is a system used to separate the varying classes of streets. Streets serve two major conflict- ing purposes; they provide access to abutting properties (local streets) and they serve to carry high traffic volumes at high speeds between destina- tion points (arterials). Since each type of street has a different function they each require different design standards. The basic assumption in this process is that in order to minimize the impacts associated with high traffic volumes, traffic should be restricted to a few arterials to keep volumes on the majority of streets to a minimum. In order for this classification system to operate, arterial streets must be improved to meet demand or they will be- come congested and traffic will seek alternative routes, often through local neighborhood streets. Streets, roads and highways within Woodburn are classified into four functional classifications. These classifications were formulated with consideration for State and County functional classifications. The functional classifications are: 1. Freeway - A divided highway with full control of access. The Freeway is not intended to provide access to abutting land. Traffic volumes gener- ally exceed 30,000 vehicles per weekday. 2. Arterials - An arterial provides for traffic movement between areas and across portions of the City or region. Directs service to principal gene- rators and connects to the freeway -expressway system. The primary function of arterials is the movement of vehicles rather than access to abutting land or temporary storage of vehicles. There are two classes of arterials in Woodburn: Principal arterials -Traffic volumes are usually higher than 10,000 vehicles daily. Minor arterials - Traffic volumes which range from 3,000 to 10,000 vehicles daily. 3. Collectors - The collector functions to conduct traffic between arterial streets, activity centers and neighborhoods. This is the principal traffic carrier within a neighborhood and also provides access to abutting land. Aver- age daily volumes range between 2,000 and 8,000 vehicles. 4. Local streets - These streets provide access to abutting land. They serve local traffic movements within neighborhoods and rural areas and are not intended to serve through traffic. Traffic volumes are generally less than 2,000 vehicles per day. An exception to the collector classification standards regarding paved widths is necessary for Cleveland Street. The location of this street next to the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks limits the improvement to 29'. A wider paved width would require alteration of the Railroad sub - grade and the engineering and economic difficulties in acheiving this would set the project back indefinitely. This project is a top priority within the Capital Improvement Program. Please see Table I for classifications and standards. 7 p--+ W J co F -- a LL a Z m M O O 3 I N Z _O F- U - V) I1_Cn d J U J Q Z _O I -- U Z O L.L. N U rt3 N N 1 N N U LLL W S_ W Q1 \ F— 4-3 3 U C N O +� m r J r C r O 0 W O N M M O U Q J LL. N LO 0l OlZE N O "D Cr O O O O Q S_ O C O O Lo LL. Q OO r O O O O N L.L1 O O 1 I O 41 M: C O O O O O N O J Ov M r O O O O m N ^ O o M N �J U i� 41 Lnv r a N +; r O "O U C N S_ Q r- U O C 4� >> N C Q < ) >� tY U Ld Ln ct U N=¢ � 3 n v L11 QJ �, ,II 3 Z Q I I 1 N N J '>_ > U •N - •r S_ dJ r-- co U O r r {� C N -0 J CT N U 4-)N S_ S_ O N r O C C U O U r co U cis QJ 3 CO a co S O U c6 U r 3 O 3 �O m O S_ N (o ru O U Of -k F- a) v t -O "O ' W O C C W r r t 1 QJ N z I I \ \ > W N N kO d d ct' O O O +-) ru Q �— �— M M M M czj' V S_ O Ur +JE a--+ _ Qi a Rs N cri N N O O O `- J ¢ •r E v -0 LL QJ -h> 4h3 co N O ',DTJ r -y N r U N QJ S_ (n N O _0 +-1 4- r- ti + O O O r Q O •r U IT 4--) rd U = U -F-) O 1 1 lO lO I O W Z F- 4-3 O 3 Ln �--+ � -h> = N O C •r S_ O N > O S S_ QUj \ r O O C) W C ¢ In >- J U m W L L. CO S � Q- r) O kD -k -c is !✓ J N Q J cf r W O !Z Q r dl ro U IY C Z W Z O O 4-) M F o_ Q S S Z ¢ J Q (D U U Qu r -P S- Z S- O C/) N O Li C I � ¢ I < t- - t q L) I- V) 3 U S_ r- M 3 Lo U N U C O r- crs 1 1 W I Z Q Q1 C r U r r W f J S S O O LL U LL. tl U J U U � STREET IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS The City of Woodburn maintains a Six Year Capital.Improvement Program which is reviewed on an annual basis. Street and storm drain capital improvements are a division of the Six Year Program. In this program projects are listed according to priority, however, the priority of a project is subject to change according to funding availability. Funds earmarked for a project may become available at a time sooner or later than the priority listing. Nearly all projects listed in the street and storm drain CIP are improve- ments to specific streets. These improvements include but are not limited to widening, subgrade reconstruction, resurfacing, storm drain installa- tion, culverting and curb and sidewalk additions. The street overlay program and the sidewalk maintenance program are two programs in the CIP which operate on a continual basis. The street overlay program involves the routine resurfacing of improved streets every fifteen years. The sidewalk maintenance program involves acquainting homeowners with City sidewalk ordinances (which require adjacent property owners to provide the maintenance) and assisting them in decisions regarding repairs and maintenance. HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS The Oregon Department of Transportation Highway Division has established a Six Year Highway Improvement Program. This program is updated every two years. The most recent update occurred in January of 1984. Within this program, highway improvement projects are placed into four categories: those approved for construction financing, those approved for development funding (i.e. preliminary engineering, environmental studies, rights-of- way acquisitions, public hearings, etc.), those that are being considered (by local governments, the public and highway division personnel) but are not approved for development or construction and those projects which are local options (i.e. programs in which ODOT has limited responsibility). Currently, there are three projects within Woodburn which have been approved for construction financing in the fiscal year indicated: Signalization at Highway 214 and Boones Ferry Road 1984, Signalization at 99E and Hardcastle 1985 and improvements on Highway 214 from the "S" curves to Settlemier 1986. There is one project which has been approved for development funding, this is the Highway 99E improvements from the North city limits to South city limits (final plans should be completed in fiscal year 1986). The Woodburn area has no projects in either the considered or local option categories of the six year program, though projects could be included in subsequent six year programs. Lei STREET SYSTEM EXPANSION Future transportation needs are directly related to growth pro- jections. A projected population increase to 23,000 by the year 2000 will necessitate expansion of the existing street network to accommodate development in new areas and increased traffic volumes. The planned locations of future arterial and collector streets will provide guidance for the location of local streets in new develop- ment areas. The following are descriptions of the recommended street improvements, modifications and extensions to the existing network of arterial and collector streets. ARTERIALS The extension of Evergreen Road South to intersect with Parr Road and the extension of Parr Road East and Southeast to intersect with Highway 99E will help relieve traffic congestion on Highway 214 and City streets such as Young and Settlemier by providing an alternative East-West route for traffic with destinations other than Woodburn (i.e. Silverton, Mt. Angel and St. Paul). When commercial and resi- dential areas surrounding the proposed arterial extensions are developed, collector and local streets will have an arterial connection. These extensions will also access the proposed City park located on property just South and adjacent to Parr Road. Evergreen Road has a right-of-way of 1001. When this road is extended and improved, the paved width should be offset within the right-of-way to provide a vegetative buffer or green area between the road and the Senior Estates residential development to the East. The extension and improvement of Parr Road should include the reloc- ation of Parr Road to the South so that it crosses the railroad tracks at a 90° angle and then continues Easterly to Highway 99E. COLLFCTORS Collector streets function to move traffic from local streets to arterial streets and provide (to a lesser degree) access to adjoin- ing lands. The following collector streets will expand the existing street network to accommodate development in presently undeveloped lands. (1) The improvement and extension of the Frontage Road South along I-5 and Southeast to connect to Parr Road. This collector will provide a connection for local streets in the development of com- mercial and residentially designated lands in the Southeast quad- rant of the I-5 interchange area. Upon development, access at Highway 214 should be removed and the street extended East to connect to Evergreen Road at some location behind the existing businesses fronting Highway 214. (2) A collector street connecting the proposed Frontage Road and Ever- green Road at a location approximately mid -point and separating commercially designated lands to the North from residentially designated lands to the South. This street will serve to provide connections for local streets and as a buffer to separate the different land uses on either side. 10 (3) A road extending North off of Arney Road and West to connect with Steven Street in West Woodburn will provide local street connections as well as access to commercial lands in the South and residential lands in the North within the Urban Growth Boundary. (4) Currently there is a large amount of undeveloped residentially designated land to the South of the proposed Parr Road extension. The extension of Brown Street South to connect to Belle Passe Road and collector extending West from Brown to intersect with Boones Ferry Road will provide connection points for local street development as well as access to surrounding lands. (5) The extension of Country Club Road East from Boones Ferry Road to Front Street has already gone through preliminary engineering and is included in the Capital Improvement Program. This exten- sion will function to collect traffic from local streets in resi- dential areas to the North and Southwest and will access public use lands to the Southeast. (6) A collector system involving the extension of Meridian Drive North from R.J. Glatt Circle and intersecting with Country Club Road and continuing North to connect with an extension of Vanderbeck Road to the East of Boones Ferry Road. Upon development, residentially designated lands surrounding these collectors will require an out- let for local street traffic. Accesses onto Boones Ferry Road (an arterial) should be kept to a minimum so as not to impede traffic flow. There are two other areas which require consideration for street development. One of these, a connection from Crosby Road to Highway 99E, is discussed in the section on Long Range Transportation Issues with regards to the develop- ment of an additional I-5 interchange at Crosby Road. The second is a new road proposal connecting East Lincoln and East Hardcastle. This road would provide an alternative North-South route for traffic, helping to relieve congestion on Highway 99E. However, this proposal lies outside the Urban Growth Boundary for the City of Woodburn and is under jurisdiction of Marion County. The County should consider this proposal and possibly the feasibility of a road extending North from the Silverton Highway (Highway 214) and connect- ing to East Lincoln. See the Transportation Plan Map I for specific locations of proposed minor arterials and collector streets. 11 TRAFFIC VOLUMES & PROJECTIONS TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic counts on minor arterial and collector streets were conducted during the summer and fall of 1984. The State Highway Division monitors traffic volumes and turning move- ments at various points along Highways 99E, 214, 211 and Interstate -5. Traffic counts were taken over a seven day period using automatic traffic counters. Counts were then averaged for a 24 hour period to obtain the average daily traffic volume(ADT). Turning movements were recorded manual- ly by the Highway Division at the intersections of Highway 99E and Highway 214, Highway 99E and Hardcastle and Highway 214 and Settlemier Avenue. Pedestrians and bicyclists were also recorded at these intersections. Traffic counts and projections for 1977, 1982 and year 2000 are part of the Transportation Study proposed by the consult- ant CH2M Hill in 1977. Traffic counts on minor arterials and collectors recorded in 1977 and 1984 and projections for 1990 and year 2000 are listed in Table II Traffic counts on State Highways 99E, 214 and 211 as well as Interstate -5 for the years 1976, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1984 and projections for 1990 and 2000 are listed in Table III . Diagrams I, II and III indicate the breakdown of turning movements at each intersection. The heaviest traffic volumes on arterials occurred on Young, Settlemier and Lincoln, with the largest increase in volume from 1977 to 1984 occurring on Lincoln. That portion of Settlemier South of Maple Street exhibited the greatest de- cline in traffic volume from 1977. Garfield and Young Streets also exhibited a slight decline in volumes. The largest increase in volume for collector streets occurred on Park Avenue North of Legion Park and on Astor Way. Country Club Road exhibited the greatest decline in traffic for the seven year period from 3700 ADT in 1977 to 1100 ADT in 1984. This decline is due in large part to the removal of a portion of the road (through Senior Estates) from public access. Harrison also exhibited a decline in traffic volumes. The significant increase in volumes on Lincoln could account for the decline on Harrison. 12 Traffic volumes on State Highway 99E showed increases at all monitored points with significant increases occurring at points just North of Hardcastle and just South of the Highway 211/ Highway 214/Highway 99E Intersection. Highway 214 exhibited increases in traffic volumes at all points with the largest increases occurring just East of the I-5 Interchange and at locations just East of Boones Ferry Road and West of the Highway 214/99E intersection. Highway 211 showed a consistant rate of increase just East of Highway 99E. Interstate -5 exhibited a steady rate of increase just South of the Highway 214 interchange. There were fluctuations in volume during the years of 1978-1982, just North of the Highway 214 inter- change. Turning movements at the intersections of Highway 99E and Highway 214, Highway 99E and Hardcastle and Highway 214 and Settlemier were monitored over a two day period for a total of sixteen hours. The intersection of Highway 214 and Highway 99E exhibited the highest number of vehicles entering at 23,591 for a sixteen hour period, 15,406 (65%) entered from the North and South and 8,185 (35%) entered from the East and West. A total of 34 bi- cyclists and 55 pedestrians were recorded moving through this intersection. The intersection of Highway 99E and Hardcastle Avenue had a total of 20,037 vehicles entering the intersection for the sixteen hour period. Vehicles entering from the North and South totaled 18,426 (92%). There were 1,611 (8%) vehicles entering from the East and West. There were 63 bicyclists and 79 pedestrians moving through the intersection. The Highway 214 and Settlemier Avenue intersection experienced a total of 18,696 vehicles moving through, of these, 6,558 (35%) entered from the North and South and 12,138 (65%) entered from the East and West. A total of 43 bicyclists and 503 pedestrians entered the intersection. This large number of pedestrians is due to the location of the Junior High School on the Northwest corner of the intersection. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS Volume projections on streets and highways were prepared for the year 1990 and 2000. These projections are based on a variety of factors, including population and dwelling unit pro- jections, comprehensive land use and development patterns and average annual increase in traffic volumes. 13 Volumes on minor arterial and collector streets have not been recorded on a consistant basis. Therefore, projections on these streets reflect developmental assumptions for sur- rounding lands and an assumed average annual increase. The largest volume increases on minor arterials from 1984 to 2000 are projected to occur on Evergreen Road (existing and ex- tended) and Settlemier (South of Maple Street). Development of large portions of vacant and available lands in these areas Will generate a significant amount of traffic. Collectors, Cleveland Street and Park Avenue are projected to exhibit the largest increases in volume by the year 2000. Though the volume on Cleveland Street did not increase during the seven year period between 1977 and 1984, the improvement of this street and development of lands to the South will significantly increase traffic volumes. It is anticipated that Park Avenue between Highway 214 and Hardcastle will function as the main collector for traffic from public use and residential areas to the East and West, with connections to arterials Highway 214 and Hardcastle to the North and South. The State Highway Division monitors traffic volumes on State Highways on an annual basis. Using 1976 as a base year, traffic volumes were analyzed for two year intervals up to 1984. Pro- jections for 1990 and 2000 reflect average annual increase and trip generation assumptions. It can be assumed that the increases in volumes on Highways within Woodburn will not only reflect growth within the City but also the growth of surrounding com- munities such as Hubbard, Silverton, Mt. Angel, Molalla, Gervais and St. Paul. The largest increases in volume on Highway 99E between 1984 and 2000 are projected to occur at points just North of Young Street, just South of Lincoln and just North of Hardcast'le. The present condition of Highway 99E would not accommodateprojected volumes. The anticipated improvement of this highway will allow for the efficient movement of traffic. Points just East of the I-5 interchange and just West of Boones Ferry Road along Highway 214 are projected to exhibit the largest increases in volume from 1984 to 2000. Signalization at the I-5 interchange on and off ramps and at Evergreen Road will be neces- sary to accommodate the increased volumes in this area. The widen- ing of Highway 214 from the I-5 interchange to Highway 99E to accommodate 4 lanes of traffic and a turning lane would greatly reduce traffic flow and capacity problems currently plaguing this area. Highway 211 at a point just East of Highway 99E, is projected to reach a volume of 10,000 average daily traffic by the year 2000. A portion of Highway 211 between Highway 99E and Cooley Road will require improvements to accommodate development and subsequent increased traffic of commercial and industrial lands in this area. 14 Interstate -5 traffic volumes fluctuated at a point just North of the Highway 214 interchange between the years of 1978 and 1982. Volumes exhibited a slight decline during these years, though the volume did increase in 1984. Volumes are projected to reach 61,000 by the year 2000 at this point and slightly less at a point just South of Highway 214. Projected traffic volumes are based on the existing street and highway system. Proposed new streets are located in areas where new development is expected and consequently they do not signifi- cantly affect projected volumes on existing streets and highways. 15 Cn Z O I— U w 7 O CL w z O J O U fq LL - LL. Q f-- C,� w I— U C) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O I -DW O O O O O O O l0 LP to LP CO O O O O O O O p O O O O O C) O O .O -}- ^C) O d- r O O O C' N CL l0 d M LO d' 1p -,o co Lo of N N r Lo N N co r N Gt' N M w O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O N WF— O 1p CJ) Ln W N O O O tI) M O O O O O O O O O O O O O d' ID Cr) r l0 al l.f) 00 (� L[) CO CO O O (� O O r M N N M M Lf) �j t\ M ^ r ^ M ^ ^ ^ CO U [L r r N r N M r r Q w J J U O F -i U LL- I( d O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q Z Cp �- C') CJl p lfl r O Ln p Lf) tD Lr) 00 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0--Q of ^ r lfl (7)p r Lo O of ^ r, F— Lf) r N N r M N d M t.0 N 1p r r N r r N >- J r N r r J Q Q C:z, H v ¢ n O O O O O O O O O O O Q fel 1 LC) r M ^ n O O Lo Lo Ol O LO O O O O p CD CD GL CT I ^ I d> O ^ ^ ^ iCD LL.j O r I-- r M r N N Lr M l0 I N M r Ch I I U j Q1 U Y O' r .}, 4--) CL O S= N CU _ n=5 =3 its C Cll O U r o O' U O L3 r U U r r Y II r re ro C J $.. Cro C J •r > -P •r 4- 4-t C rC5 r .i-) 4- LI-- v) c o o U 3 N o ro o o >) U = 4-- c) t � m v o z >> = � o 0 -C~ ..c S r0 +) i) o 5_ 0 4- 4-) J Q J - 1 Z7 O O i (ll ro 4- O O 4- _ o +-) ro QJ i7 O o cn N Q - N 3 N o A v c N +3-) r Cn 3 W Of v +) a-' 3 +j a) y, t w a aI (Ii F- c o +-) .� o Q) v Z 0 +-)3 c a1 O N �� C a c 3 N > CT Q) rti `� U r o r Q) O U p r i O Q Q S S O S c 4- Q r r 0-)w S C o 3 «i () d--) -Zr o Z O O S_ C C a) +) 0 J +� o U N > Q) c = U S_ rn Y Y 41 +1 > > L S- ro ro •r ro LU LL w C7 S •r J a) (ll O J N V) O (n S. rtS r +-) a1 S.. S. N N >- U Q M U U c-) cD = O CSL Ci 3 3 Z I- O O H Q U W W CU 7 H (/) CD LL - 3 a I O H � 1Q_ f O H O O H O W_ > S U O J O O O H W _ LY] J Q F- O C:) O O F¢-- O O O O W N O U CD O H Q O W O LL- tY W LO LL_ W -zl- ^ Q � M CY) � d O U) f -- W I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W O LC) W LO O 1l- -zl- ^ M M CY) M O O U) LO O CD 'O D O O N N N d' LC) ^ Or O d' O d' d' O r O Orf N r r N N N N r N N r r CL W f- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W O CO LO l0 Lf) O O 13- Ol -y- LO O 00 LO LC) O LO M ^ O ch O Ol r r W CT r Ol M M Gf' I� CY) M r r Lfl LI) •• ct� r 0- r r r r N r r r r r r r LO LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O �I0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 00 O O 1p O O Lo Ol M CO O O CO O r N Ol Co :d- LOCY)^ r O r M r\ r N M LO LO r Cil Ol LO d' Ll 0 0 r r r r r r r r r M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LO O O CO t\ (7)O r O 00 M N Ol d- Cil M M 00 1p (T t.0 �p r W O l0 CO l0 d' CD r M M r r (a)d d Ln Ln r r r r r r r r M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O CO CO d' Ol l0 a) ct l0 Lf) CO O l0 M CY) r ^ ^ CD ^ r co O r d' LL) LO KZ}- O O M LO r r CO Ol LO Z}- tZ lfl r r r r r r r r M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O COIO O O O O O O O O Ln O O O O O O O O O O L- LC) N d' ^ ^ l0 r ct r Cl) N N d- LO 00 d O d LC) r 00 O ch Lf) d- M O m M d- Ol Ol Lf) LC) d d d lfl LC r r- r r r r M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LO O Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C- CO d' O O co 00 LO O Cil O LO (O r N LO r 1\ M Ol r I� O M M r r Ol 00 N d' CO 00 LC) LO G1 d M O O r r r r r M M V) N C 4J r r r r N N 41 CU Cil CP O +-) Li LL W W W �. C C U N CT M N = (LS N N N Cil M Ol N N + O O U 3 3 +--1 cn LO LO (L) (1) N a •r >- >- J -0 S S •r 4-.3 1 I C C • Cl:: 4--> 0X 4- 4- 4- � 4- 4- H ~, o O C 3 3 C E 3 3 3 J O O O S O O J r- 4- 4- CO co S S O •r O S LC)LLI S S �t J O O J (r >) .0 -C t 4- t t 4- 4- 4- 4- Sr S_ r 4- W 4- 4 - CT 4-.) 4-) +-) -N O +-) -h1 +-� N 4 4-> O O O O v >> (1) N O F-. O O = S- O Z3 S` +-1 N N > 4--) > Q >- U O O O O O U >- r CU R3 r - r > I-- Q -+ V) Z V) Z V) Z ¢ U 3 w 3 W 3 w- U •r Q W Z N 3 t S N N � S d--1 4.3 4-) +-) +--) -P +-3 +- +-� +� -1 +-) +-> -P a--) +-) = a--3 W +-> C'3 Ln S- CD N N (n N N N (n C N C C'3 (n -P N (n (-+ O Z3 O O = C :3 :3 = Z3 O M O F( =3 Z :3 =3 S V) '7 '7 '"7 '7 '7 7 Z S 3 7 -D '7 '7 7 7— W — S -D H � 7 i "OREGON STATE HIGHWAY DIVISIO' N TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SECTION TWENTY-FOUR HOUR VEHICULAR DATEZ?jC.... f 1 A Y OF WEEK 7,�............ ACTUAL COUNT (VEH.) .... /�........... HRS. HOURS COUNTED PEDESTRIAN COUNT ...../.,� .............. HRS. HOURS COUNTED WEATHER.V&, V�`."r..- Q �.......... VOLUME CITY R COUNTY .i�c%uCI1 INTERSECTION OFt4¢t�,flcy. �.�f.�!Y.:?.-5./.;� MILE POS-(/..,= CLASSIFICATION K:7.�K,�yo1.... 9.2•`�� .��5?�....Qr�i?� l.. Q �lCS••................ TO-------- --- ---53`_/k -- Remarks: I I". No. y, TOTAL VEHICLES ENTERING INT[RsecrIoN 2�/ LOQ NORTH lFG FROM ` NORTH t7 e SOUTH' 5 ENTERING r T f,l, l 3 EAST a w[sT t� es_ —= �_7�C� To /110 Al lea- — — — --- 01 N f/e,+ -t:'16 / —;> Q STREET OR AVE. Indicate t.i North Q 0 wui W W N 1 'AEGON STATE HIGHWAY DIVISI TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SECTION TWENTY-FOUR HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME BATE.�:1.3(flm).E..j q.CAtA,..l.i ............. DAY OF WEEK /11o4.£.nils......................... ACTUAL COUNT (VEH.) ..... 1Lz........... NRS. HOURS COUNTED "/l.?..1:6/.0................ PEDESTRIAN COUNT .....,16 ............... NRS. HOURS COUNTED .,"41. &1010 CITY Oft-..L.t1 �lvr�r.................... INTERSECTION R E ORz MILE POST.�_.:.(.1'.............................................. ..................................... CLASSIFICATION II/P.jnftcIC,S...................... WEATHER .G�fcar.��JAu.�......................... 119, To _Vz w!2n o w n— — — — -- Remarks: 1�1 ll_o� SrOv'� GS` -,C(Z—_ J°I I j q9E I I (\I N No. TOTAL VEHICLES ENTERING INTERSECTION Zoo3 7 100 ENTERING FROMi4r�(Z�o 9Z NORTH a SOUTH ENTERING FROM EAST a W[dT 0 q/3 l:1 -L- R s -,- a �c�cos�1 e'— STREET OR AVE. Indicate North OREGON STATE HIGHWAY DIVISION TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SECTION TWENTY-FOUR HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME DATE �.... (...... �.,.. Q . DAY OF WEEK-%�u�S..F. �r..�............ ACTUAL COUNT (VEH.) ........I.Cr ........ HRS. HOURS COUNTED PEDESTRIAN COUNT.....I. ............... HRS. HOURS COUNTED WEATHER C.' (Au ray H TO QS12 ILAL r —_ 1,3 q3 � 57G I i I 1 1 I I Remarks: wAhu q3----- Qv jo CITY 9A GGUNTV..Lill .V.! !�............ INTERSECTION OF;�CS o.0 R.-.Si.lu�rt�►�..., .Sc.+i>;r�.ti.t,�..Ax>Y...... ....................... MILEPOST:�7............................................... CLASSIFICATION.%.(..�/�i�t:��G..�.................. v; c� I �I �I 1 ` IDl Ped. as P�� 7 No. %TVTIL VEHICLES ENTERING «69 6 100 INTERSECTION ENTERING FROM NORTH s SOUTH —6 T�- ENTERING FROM r3� EAST d WEST To _q3 L-_ ------- (L 21y ST.FgET OR AVE. Indicate tai North Q J � 7 O L W J W r Cr �0 3 v g -, Rev. 3_ _Q _ CAPACITY & LEVEL OF SERVICE The Highway Research Board in their Highway Capacity Manual has established various standards for measuring traffic capa- city and levels of service of a roadway or intersection. Capa- city can be defined as"the maximum number of vehicles that can pass over a given section of a street or highway (either in one direction or both directions) during a given time period under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions". Levels of service (LOS) can be described as "the different operating conditions which occur on a lane or roadway when accommodat- ing various traffic volumes". Levels of service are quali- tative measures of the effect of traffic flow factors, such as speed and travel time, interruptions, freedom to maneuver, driver comfort and convenience and, indirectly, safety and operating costs. Six levels of service have been established ranging from level "A" where there is relatively free traffic flow, low volumes and high speeds, to level "F" with forced flow operations at low speeds and frequent stoppages due to vehicle back up from restrictions downstream. A description of each service level is provided in Table IV . The State Highway Division prepares capacity and level of ser- vice studies whenever major improvements are planned for State Highways. Highway 99E is slated for major improvements within the next five years. The level of service has been determined at the intersections of Highway 99E/Highway 211, Highway 99E/ Hardcastle and Highway 99E/Lincoln. These intersections are currently operating at level of service "C" and approaching level of service "D". The anticipated improvement of Highway 99E should maintain the level of service at "C". Congestion on arterials during short periods of time may occur through- out the day because of conflicts with left turning vehicles. However, these types of congestion may occur for such short periods of time that the arterial may not be considered to have a capacity deficiency. 21 TABLE IV SERVICE LEVELS FOR ARTERIAL ROADWAYS TYPICAL TRAFFIC FLOW CONDITIONS SERVICE LEVEL "A" Relatively free flow of traffic with some stops at signalized or stop sign controlled intersections. Average speeds would be at least 30 miles per hour. SERVICE LEVEL "B" Stable traffic flow with slight delays at signalized or stop sign controlled intersections. Average speed would vary between 25 and 30 miles per hour. SERVICE LEVEL "C" Stable traffic flow but with delays at signalized or stop sign controlled intersections to be greater than at level B but yet acceptable to the motorist. The average speeds would vary between 20 and 25 miles per hour. SERVICE LEVEL "D" Traffic flow would approach unstable operating condi- tions. Delays at signalized or stop sign controlled intersections would be tolerable and could include waiting through several signal cycles for some motor - its. The average speeds would vary between 15 and 20 miles per hour. SERVICE LEVEL "E" Traffic flow would be unstable with congestion and intolerable delays to motorists. The average speed would be approximately 15 miles per hour. SERVICE LEVEL "F" Traffic flow would be forced and jammed with stop and go operating conditions and intolerable delays. The average speed would be less than 15 miles per hour. * Capacity of service level "E". NOTE: The average speeds are approximations observed at the various levels of service but could differ depending on actual condi- tions. TRAFFIC CONTROL INVENTORY Signs and signalization devices for the control of traffic move- ments are standardized in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Traffic control signs are used to either regulate traffic, warn traffic or guide traffic. The The MUTCD standardizes traffic signs as to their design, shape, color, dimension, symbols, word message, lettering, illumination and reflectorization, location, height, lateral clearance and mounting. Signs are basically of three types: regulatory, warn- ing and guidance. Traffic control locations and future locations are shown on Map II. Signal devices include but are not limited to traffic control signals (at intersections), beacons, lane use control signals, drawbridge signals, emergency traffic control signals and train approach signals and gates. Within Woodburn there are currently in operation six intersection signals these are all located on Highways 99E and 214 and are upgraded and maintained by the State Highway Division. Railroad crossings located on Cleveland, Young, Lincoln, Hardcastle, Settlemier and Highway 99E are controlled by gates and signals. Signalized intersections are listed in Table V. The signal on Highway 99E and Hardcastle is scheduled to be in- stalled in the spring of 1985. The State Highway Division does not, at this time, have plans to install signals at other locations on Highways 99E and 214. However, increased traffic volumes and the expansion of the street and highway system will require con- sideration of locations for future signalization. Consideration should be given for signalization at the Interstate 5 off and on ramps. The development of available properties East and West of I-5 will have a definite impact on traffic flow in this area. The State Highway Division has conducted a study on traffic impacts of development West of the I-5/Hwy. 214 Interchange. In this study it is stated that by 1988 both ramp intersections would require signals and that analysis of future traffic would assume signals at the ramp intersections. The extension of Evergreen Road South and development of commercial land in this area will generate a significant amount of traffic. The intersection of Evergreen Road and Highway 214 will require signalization and realignment of the entrance into Fairway Plaza to accommodate this development. Another possible location of signalization would be the Parr Road, Settlemier and Front Street intersection. This flat angle inter- section makes it difficult for drivers to see vehicles on the other street thus increasing the potential for conflict. Parr Road is to be relocated to the South and will cross the railroad at 90 degrees and continue Easterly to Highway 99E. When this and subsequent development of residential lands occurs, signals may be warranted at both Parr Road and Settlemier and Parr and Hwy. 99E intersections to accommodate traffic flow. 23 An area to consider for possible traffic control revision is the Country Club Road and Oregon Way intersections. The close proximity of these two intersections has the effect of disrupt- ing traffic flow and causing long waits for traffic turning onto Highway 214 from Country Club Road and Oregon Way. A possible solution would be to realign Country Club Road to the East to be across from Oregon Way. Another possible solution would be to close off Oregon Way to through traffic at Highway 214. Either of these solutions would have the effect of eliminating an inter- section thus improving the traffic flow in the area. ACCESS CONTROL Access along arterial and collector streets should be controlled by the City to minimize the problems caused by vehicles entering and exiting the traffic flow. An optimum level of access is acheived when the arterial or collector intersects only with other arterial and collectors or major driveways. A reasonable compro- mise between the conflicting requirements of mobility and access can be acheived by the optimum spacing of intersections that per- mits movement in both directions without disruption of desirable traffic flow and speed. The limitation of driveway access on arterial and collectors can improve the quality of traffic flow and also improve accessibility to adjoining properties. The quality of accessibility is not mea- sured by the number of driveways. Good accessibility can be ob- tained by concentrating access at specific points which can be effeciently controlled and regulated. The long term effects of poor access management are erosion of roadway capacity and in- creased accident frequency. Access control along highways can often provide the most cost effective means of maintaining high- way capacity and should be implemented wherever feasible. 24 P1 Q 2 SIGNAL INTERSECTION MOUNT TABLE V SIGNAL CONTROL WALK YEAR HFAn MnnFi TNnTrATnD ThICTAi i rn Country Club & Hwy. 214 Mast 12" 170 Yes 1977 3 -Way Oregon Way & Hwy. 214 Mast 12" 170 Yes 1977 3 -way Settlemier 12"(Red) Upgraded & Hwy. 214 Span 8"(Yellow, 170 Yes Fall 1984 4 -Way Green) 6 Phase Hwy. 214 & 99E Span 12" 170 Yes 1974 6 Phase 4 -Way Hardcastle Install & 99E Span 12" 170 Yes Spring 4 -way 1985 Lincoln & 99E Span 12"(Red) 8"(Yellow, Singer 2000 Yes 1975 4 -way Green) 2 Phase Young & Span 12" 170 Yes Upgraded 6 Phase 1982 4 -way TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS Traffic accidents occurring at intersections on state highways and city streets were examined for the years 1979 through 1984. During this time period a total of 461 accidents occurred at ninety six intersections for an average frequency rate of 4.8 accidents per year. Highway and city street intersections ex- hibiting the most frequent number of accidents are shown in Table VI . An average frequency rate of 3.4 accidents per year occurred at the twelve highway intersections. The Highway 214/Highway 99E intersection has the highest frequency rate of 8.3 accidents per year followed closely by 7.8 at the Highway 214/Settlemier intersection. The average accident frequency rate for the nine city street intersections was 1.2 per year with the Garfield/First intersection exhibiting the highest frequency of 2.3 accidents per year. The frequency of accidents occurring at highway intersections is due primarily to the high traffic volumes on State Highway 214 and 99E. Unsignalized intersections such as Hardcastle and James have realized a significant increase in accidents from 1983 to 1984. The signalization of Hardcastle in 1985 and the widening and improvements of 99E and 214 through the City will greatly enhance traffic flow in this area and may help to -reduce accidents. The frequency rate of accidents occurring at city street inter- sections is somewhat less than the highway rate due to the lower traffic volumes, lower speeds and the use of signs to control traffic movements. The installation of traffic control signals is often assumed to be a solution for any and all safety and traffic problems at intersections. However, the primary function of traffic control signals is to assign the right-of-way at intersecting streets or highways, where the continual flow of vehicles on one street would cause excessive delay for vehicles waiting on the other street or highway. When considering signalization at intersections primarily for safety purposes it is important that extensive study be made to determine whether a signal will indeed reduce the occurrence of accidents. If the signal is well warranted and properly engineered, safety and reduced accidents may result but these are only incidental to the main purpose of the signals which is the effective and orderly flow of traffic. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices requires certain studies be done to determine the need of traffic control signals these studies are: traffic volumes (vehicular and pedestrian), approach travel speeds, physical condition diagrams, accident history and collision diagrams, gap and delay studies. These studies should provide the necessary data for the design and operation of an effective traffic control signal. 27 Most local and collector streets will not require traffic control signals, the use of stop signs should be sufficient. Arterial streets intersecting with other collectors, arterials and highways, if not presently signalized, may require signal consideration to accommodate projected traffic volumes. Though, too many signals may have the effect of impeding traffic flow. TABLE VI MOST FREQUENT ACCIDENT INTERSECTIONS HIGHWAY INTERSECTIONS CITY STREET INTERSECTIONS Garfield/ First 1979 1 1980 1981 1 1982 1983 1984 TOTAL Fre,Rate Hwy. 214/Hwy. 99E 7 5 7 9 7 15 50 8.3 Hwy. 214/Settlemier 8 6 8 8 6 11. 47= 7.8 Hwy. 99E/ Hardcastle 4 -1 5 5 1 15. 31-- 5.2 Hwy. 99E/,Young _ 3 6 7 0 6 7 29 18 4.8 3,0 Hwy. 99E/Lincoln 0 3 5 1 6 2 Hwy. 99E/ Hwy. 211 Hwy. 99E/ James 1 2 3 1 1 0 1 1 3 2 9 9 18 15 3.0 2.5 Hwy. 99E/Cleveland 1 0 10 0 0 3 14 2.3 Hwy. 214/ Boones Ferry 2 4 0 1 1 2 10 1.7 Hwy. 214/ Evergreen 1 3 0 0 0 4 8 13 Hwy. 214/ Front 1 0 1 0 4 2 8 1.3 Hwy. 214/ Country Club 1 0 1 1 2 0 5 .8 GRAND TOTAL: 31 33 45 27 38 79 253 3.4 Ave. CITY STREET INTERSECTIONS Garfield/ First 2 2 3 2 3 2 14 2.3 Lincoln/ First 4 0 0 2 1 6 13 2.2 Front/ Lincoln 0 2 5 0 2 l 10 1.6 Garfield/ Settlemier 2 .0 2 1 1 0 6 1. Lincoln/ Third 2 3 0 0 0 0 5 .8 Lincoln/ Settlemier 0 3 1 1 1 0 6 1. Harrison/ Settlemier 2 0 0 0 0 2 4 .7 Hardcastle/ Park 1 0 0 1 2 0 4 .7 Country Club/ Rainier 0 1 0 1 0 2 4 .7 GRAND TOTAL: 13 11 11 8 10 13 66 1.2 Ave. 29 OI, PARKING INVENTORY Parking is allowed on nearly all streets within the study area, with the exception of the State Highway 214, 211 and 99E. The inventory shown in Appendix II lists each street, its functional classification, and indicates whether parking is allowed, not allowed, allowed on portions or allowed on one side of the street. Since nearly half of all streets in the study area do not meet the minimum design standard width of 321, accommodation of moving and parked cars can sometimes prove to be an excercise in manuever- ability. Most minor arterials do not allow parking on those portions of the street with heaviest traffic volume, an exception would be Young Street with a paved width of 40' which can accommodate parking and movement. Movement on arterial streets should be a priority over parking. It may be wise to consider removal of on street parking when parking begins to impede traffic flow causing hazards for both motorist and vehicle. Local and collector streets function to access residential and move traffic within and out of residential neighborhoods. Because of the access function, these streets often allow parking and should be designed for proper width to accommodate on street parking. Off-street parking is subject to standards established by the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. Within the ordinance the amount of parking required depends on the type of use the land is subject to. For example retail stores are required to provide one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area plus one space per every two employees. Single family resi- dences are required to provide one and one half spaces per dwelling unit. There are three public parking lots, excluding those at public parks, located within the downtown core area. One lot is located on the corner of Cleveland and First and has spaces for thirty-five vehicles. The second lot is located on the corner of First and Garfield and can accommodate fifty vehicles. A third lot is located behind the Post Office between Lincoln and Grant and has room for approximately fifty vehicles. There does not, at present, appear to be a shortage of park- ing spaces for vehicles seeking to park in the downtown commercial area. Though potential redevelopment of the downtown core area could generate a significant amount of traffic to warrant consideration of additional Off-street parking. Businesses located in other commercial zones along Highway 99E, the I-5 Interchange area and the Highway 214/Hwy.99E inter- section provide parking areas for customers. There does not appear to be a shortage of parking in these areas at this time. Though the widen- ing and improvement of Hwy. 99E may remove some parking in front of businesses. Two City parks, Legion and Settlemier, have large parking lots available for public use. There are no plans, at this time, for the construction of additional public parking facilities. 30 RAIL TRANSIT The National Railroad Passenger Corporation, known as Amtrak, provides the only regularly scheduled rail passenger service in Oregon, carrying passengers on a north -south route between San Diego and Vancouver, B.C. Daily service by one train between Portland and Los Angeles serves the intermediate cities of Salem, Eugene and Klamath Falls. Woodburn is situated on the Amtrak line but has no scheduled stops. With more people living in Woodburn, and with greater travel requirements to the Portland and Salem metropolitan areas and with increasing expense of operating private automobiles, rail service to those areas may be a fea- sible alternative in the future. In 1976 the Oregon Department of Transportation completed the Willamette Valley Passenger Rail Study. This study is informational only and makes no recommendations for future use of rail services. In summary, the study indicates that a light rail transit system would not, within the next decade, be feasible. However, by the year 2000 population densities and the demand for alternative transportation systems may well warrant the financial commit- ment for a rail system that would connect the major cities in the Wallamette Valley. Constructing such a rail system would be no more expensive than adding two or more lanes to the interstate system and would not remove as much productive land from use as expansion of the interstate system would. A rapid rail system, as compared to the automobile, is a clean and efficient means of moving large numbers of people. Access to railroad services is an important locational criteria for certain industries. Moving materials by rail is approximately seven times more effi- cient than by truck. With rising fuel costs and uncertainty over fuel avail- ability, the railroad will become an increasingly important mode for shipping. The existing track running through Woodburn is under jurisdiction of the Southern Pacific Railroad. This track can accommodate freight lines as well as the Amtrak line. The City should retain as many options as possible for railroad sidings along this line. The City has previously established a transportation policy regarding the transport of dangerous goods by rail (see Policy Statements). The transport of hazardous materials by rail or other means is subject to State Statutes though it may be in the best interests of the community to establish addi- tional policies regarding inter -City movement of hazardous wastes and mate- rials. AIRPORT FACILITIES There are currently no airports located within the City of Woodburn or the Urban Growth Boundary. The Aurora State Airport is the nearest facility to Woodburn. International air traffic is accommodated by the Portland Inter- national Airport approximately 40 miles to the north in Portland. McNary Field in Salem is classified as an air carrier airport and is capable of handling commercial passenger aircraft. The State Division of Aeronautics in their Oregon Aviation System, Technical Report analyzed present and future aviation facilities and needs throughout Oregon. 31 Recommendations for airports within Marion County are limited to improv- ing facilities at McNary Field and Aurora State Airport. Any improvements or expansions to Aurora State Airport will have a positive effect on Woodburn's economic development and the City should lend its support to any proposed expansions or improvements. There are no plans, at this time, for any other major air facilities in Marion County. The County and State may wish to consider the formation of a Port District Commission for North Marion County upon future development or expansion of air facilities. The development of airport facilities is an important land use and zoning issue. Within the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance airports are allowed only in PA - Public Amusement and Recreation districts. Aircraft maintenance faci- lities are allowed in CG - Commercial General districts. Development of any air facilities within Woodburn would be subject to the review process as are any other types of development. 32 ADDITIONAL I-5 INTERCHANGE DEVELOPMENT As the City of Woodburn and surrounding communities realize population growth, traffic pressures for use of the Highway 214/I-5 Interchange will increase. To relieve this pressure the City is interested in evaluating the potential of securing an additional access onto the I-5 system. The consequences of not addressing the issue of an additional interchange at this time would be detrimental to the transportation future of Woodburn and surrounding communities. The year 2000 projected population for Woodburn is approximately 23,000. The existing Highway 214 interchange would be unable to accommodate the increased traffic volumes produced by this growth and the growth of other communities such as Molalla, Silverton, Mt. Angel, Hubbard and Gervais. Also with this size population, Woodburn would have the dubious distinction of being the only community of this size along the I-5 corridor, with only one interchange. To alleviate this potential problem requires cooper- ation from Marion County, Oregon Land Conservation and Development Com- mission, Oregon Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Existinq policies of the County, State and FHWA are to discourage addi- tional access points onto I-5 unless certain criteria can be met. The FHWA in their 1983 Estimate of the Cost of Completing the Interstate System Chapter III, Pages 12 and 13 requires: "State documentation for justification of an additional interchange normally will include the following information in addition to other data demonstrating public benefits or need: (1) A statement of the type of condition of the crossroad including: (a) The system or regional plan of which it is a part. (b) ADT, current and design year; through and turning. (c) Number of existing traffic lanes and type of highway. (d) Probable number of traffic lanes for the design year. (e) Distance to and size of communities directly served. (f) Distance to the next interchange in each direction. (2) An analysis of the crossroads, the other roads and streets in the area, and the relation of the interchange to them and to other interchanges to assure the ability of the said streets and roads to effectively collect and distribute interstate highway traffic. (3) The relationship of the interchange to adjacent interchanges of the interstate highway and the acceptable merge and diverge lengths, and the ability to sign adequately. (4) The existence of other roads or streets, or the probability of developing them generally parallel to the Interstate System, which could be used by interstate highway traffic by way of interchanges other than the one under consideration in traveling to and from its origin or destination. (5) A statement of the cost resulting from construction of the inter- change, together with the estimated benefit -cost ratio, as part of a cost effectiveness analysis. II (6) A special case where the interchange is clearly necessary to serve a compelling public need." A first step in the procurement of this information would be to work with the County and State to gain their approval and support. Ultimately, the FHWA will require the Oregon Department of Transportation to submit "documentation for justification of an additional interchange." Upon receiving this information the FHWA will conduct their own analysis, the final decision will be made by the Secretary of the U. S. Department of Transportation. The approval process may take many years, therefore it is important to get the process underway now, so as not to jeopardize the transportation and economic future of Woodburn and surrounding communities. I-5 INTERCHANGE - LOCATIONAL ANALYSIS Additional interchanges on the Interstate -5 System require an analysis of the area wide street and highway system and surrounding land uses. Locational decisions are based upon this analysis as well as an analysis of potential con- struction costs. An in depth locational analysis is beyond the scope of this plan and will require cooperation with the County and State. However, a brief analysis of existing overpasses in the area and their potential for interchange development is in order. There are four overpasses within three miles (to the North or South) of the Highway 214 interchange. The overpasses and approximate mileage from Hwy. 214 are: Broadacres - 3 miles North Crosby Rd. - 1.5 miles North Butteville Rd. - 1.2 miles South St. Louis Rd. - 2.8 miles South All of these overpasses are outside the Urban Growth Boundary for the City and are under jurisdiction of Marion County. The zoning around these overpasses reflects an "Exclusive Farm Use" (EFU) designation according to the Marion County Planning Department. The intention of an additional interchange is to provide an alternative access to the Woodburn area and surrounding communities to relieve existing and potential capacity problems on the Hwy. 214 interchange. The intention is not to create another commercial interchange area. It would be the City's desire for the County to maintain existing land uses. There are many locational advantages and disadvantages of interchange development at these overpasses. Crosby Road and Butteville Road have the advantages of be- ing close enough to provide an alternative access for accommodating present and projected urbanized areas. An interchange at Butteville Road would have the advantage of accessing residential and commercial land in the Southern half of Woodburn and provide a connection to 99E via the Parr Road extension. An inter- change at Crosby Road has an advantage of accessing residential and industrial lands in the Northern half of Woodburn providing an alternative route for truck traffic. The existing Crosby Road overpass has the advantage of being conducive to interchange development without extensive re-engineering and construction. Whereas, Butteville Road would require the complete construction of a new over- pass, off and on ramps and realignment of Butteville Road and Parr Road. The cost of constructing additional interchanges on the I-5 system is an important consideration of the FHWA in the approval process. Sul Interchange development at Broadacres Road or St. Louis Road, though further away, may better satisfy the overall regional needs of the Mid -Willamette Valley. Broadacres Road may be more appropriate for accommodating traffic generated by growth areas developing South of Portland (e.g. recent indus- trial, high technology growth in Wilsonville). The major disadvantage of additional interchange development at any of these overpasses is the impacts to surrounding property and roadway capacity. There- fore, it is important that detailed analysis be made of each potential inter- change and how it fits in with the overall community needs and regional pattern. GOAL To secure an additional interchange access on the Interstate -5 System. OBJECTIVE To secure the additional access at a location that will best serve com- munity and regional needs. POLICIES (1) Work with the County and State to prepare documentation for justi- fication of an additional interchange. (2) With the support of the County and State, approach the Federal Highway Administration for consideration of an additional interchange on the Interstate System. 35 ENERGY AVAILABILITY It can be assumed, for purposes of this study, that energy will continue to be available. However, it is expected that some forms of energy will become increasingly scarce and expensive. In order to be prepared for the increasing cost of energy and potential energy shortages the City should explore a variety of energy alternatives. In 1981 City staff reviewed alternatives to assist the City in keeping down its energy bill. These alternatives included efficient weatherization of public buildings, fuel efficient vehicles and machinery and fuel production. At that time a detailed study was prepared titled "A Strategy for Lowering Fuel Cost for the City". This strategy involves the production of ethanol from vegetative waste matter to use as a substitute for gasoline in City vehicles, including transit buses. This program would be inexpensive to initiate and operate and would result in reduced fuel costs for the City. Since 1981 fuel prices and availability have stabilized somewhat. However, the interruption of the flow of foreign oil has in the past and could in the future disrupt the operation of City func- tions. In the event that such a situation arises the City should be prepared to implement energy alternatives in order to maintain desired service levels at an affordable price. 0• ma FUNDING SOURCES Funding sources for transportation improvements can come from a variety of sources. Current funding for street construction, improvements and maintenance is derived from assessments, bond sales, gas taxes, connec- tion fees, State and Federal Revenue Sharing and Federal Aid programs. The funds and their sources are listed below: SABB Special Assessment St. CIF Street Capital Improvement SRS Street Revenue Sharing FAU Federal Aid Urban, FAP/FAS Primary & Secondary SF Street Fund SG State Grant FRS Federal Revenue Sharing SRF Street Revenue Fund GF General Fund Bancroft Bonds Fund Connection Fees State of Oregon Federal Highway Admin. Federal Highway Admin. Gas Tax State of Oregon Federal Government Gas Tax Carryover Property Tax Funds may become available through other programs and grants on a less con- sistant basis. Though, the listed sources are subject to funding availability and changes in Federal and State policies. The City should consider alter- native funding programs such as City-wide Bond issues and Local Improvement Districts for transportation improvement. Funding sources for the Transit System are primarily obtained from the General Fund and through grants from the Urban Puss Transportation Administration. Other sources of income include fares and Dass sales. A portion of the State Gas Tax is distributed to local jurisdictions based on population. One percent of these funds is required to be spent on bicycle and pedestrian facilities within street and highway right-of-ways. 37 'Y'll PLAN EVALUATION & F PLAN REVIEW AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES The Transportation Plan has been developed around a given set of demographic and economic assumptions as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. However, it would be presumptuous to expect that all of these projections will occur with- in the next twenty years. It is not possible to anticipate every problem which the future will bring. Therefore, it is necessary to provide procedures for the review, evaluation, update and amendment of the plan. The Comprehensive Plan is reviewed on a biennial basis. The Transportation Plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan is subject to this review. Also, the Capital Improvement Program for Streets and Highways is updated on an annual basis. It is recommended that the City continue the biennial review and annual update of the C.I.P. To ensure that the plan has not departed significantly from the emerging transportation pattern, an in depth evaluation of the major assumptions, projections and policies of the Transportation Plan should be conducted at least once every five years. A major update and revis- ion of the Transportation Plan should occur once every ten years. This update would include the inventory, assessment and analysis of all transportation com- ponents. It is important that the City remain flexible in the review process in order to assess transportation needs of new developments. PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES The Transportation Plan may be amended during any of the review processes as described previously. Changes may be made as a result of the review process or at the request of local, county and state governments. These changes must be endorsed by the Planning Commission and City Council and any other affected jurisdiction. These changes will be reviewed through the public hearing process. These procedures are identified to maintain the flexibility of the Transporta- tion Plan in order to respond to changing conditions as they emerge and as they differ from that anticipated during this study's preparation. It is intended that the Transportation Plan remain a flexible, dynamic document that can be altered with satisfactory justification through the procedures previously described. IN A. STREET CLASSIFICATIONS & STANDARDS Street standards are a design form which relate to roadway function and operational characteristics such as traffic volume, operating speed and capacity. Street standards are necessary to provide a community with roadways which have been determined through extensive research and experience to be relatively safe, aesthetic and easy to administer when new roadways are planned or constructed. Presently, within the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance (Section 3B), there are street design standards for eight types of street classifications; major arterials, minor arterials, major col- lectors, minor collectors, residential, cul-de-sac turn around and alley. These classification categories were modified to combine the major and minor collector into collector, local street replaces the residential classification and the addition of the freeway category. Design standards for these classifi- cations have also been modified and are shown in Table I. Standards for freeways (I-5) and principal arterials (Hwy. 214, Hwy. 99E and Hwy. 211) reflect standards established by highway engineers. 1. In order to eliminate redundancy and provide consistency in code language with regards to street standards, it is recom- mended that Section 3, Subsection B of the Woodburn Subdivi- sion Ordinance "Minimum Right -of -Way Widths" and Section 8.010 of Chapter 8 of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance "Minimum Street Width", be combined and revised to be included in the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8 General Standards under Section 8.010 subtitle "Street Design Standards". The revision would state: All street right-of-way and paved width shall not be less than: RIGHT-OF-WAY PAVED WIDTH a. Minor Arterials 80 to 100 ft. 36 to 44 ft. b. Collectors 60 ft. 34 to 40 ft. c. Local 60 ft. 34 to 36 ft. d. Cul -De -Sac 50 to 60 ft. 34 to 36 ft. e. Cul -De -Sac (Turnaround) 46.5 ft. radius 40 ft. radius f. Alley 20 ft. 20 ft. The revision should also include a cross reference to the Sub- division Ordinance for other street standards associated with subdivision development. A cross reference to the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Section 8.010 should be included in the place of Section 3, Subsection B of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. The Woodburn Subdivision Ordinance, Section 2, Subsection R numbers 1 through 6 should be amended to be consistent with the definitions for arterials, collectors and local streets as defined in the Functional Classifications section of this Transportation Plan. 3. An exception to the collector street design standards will be allowed for Cleveland Street only. 39 B. STREET & HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS 1. The City shall continue to maintain and update, on an annual basis, the Six Year Capital Improvement Program to insure that streets and highways are consistently monitored for improvement needs. 2. The City shall continue to work with Marion County and the State Highway Division in establishing needed improvement projects for county roads within the UGB and for State High- ways 214, 99E, 211 and Interstate -5. V 3. The City shall work with the State Highway Division to request the ODOT Transportation Commission to include in the 1986-1991 Six Year Highway Improvement Program a project to improve High- way 214 between I-5 and Park Avenue to five lanes. 4. The City shall pursue the development of an additional I-5 interchange by working with -.and gaining support from the County, State and Federal Highway Administration. C. STREET SYSTEM EXPANSION 1. In order to accommodate growth projections and development pat- terns as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, the City shall pur- sue the development of arterials and collectors as outlined in the Transportation Plan. 2. Local streets in new development areas should be located to pro- vide appropriate connections to the collector and arterial system to enhance the overall transportation network of the area. D. MAINTAINING TRAFFIC COUNTS 1. In order to provide a data base for future transportation analysis the City shall monitor traffic volumes on all arterial and col- lector streets (and others as needed) on an annual basis. E. TRAFFIC CONTROL During field reconnaissance, possible changes that could improve traffic control were noted. These observations include such items as additional signs or pavement markings, removal of signs or mark- ings, relocation of signs, signal revisions, parking revisions and removal of obstructions to sign and sight visibility. 1. Highway 99E (a) Investigate the need for a warning sign for Southbound traffic approaching a private road to a grocery store and John Deere dealer North of Highway 214. (b) Lower the speed limit from 45 mph to 35 mph from Al's Fruit and Shrub to just North of Industrial Avenue. nn 2. Highway 214 (a) Install left turn signals for North and South bound traffic at Highway 99E. (b) Eliminate two accesses into Fairway Plaza shopping center, locate an entrance to be across from Ever- green Road. 3. Young Street and Silverton Hwy.(Hwy. 214) (a) Install a "Signal Ahead" sign for Eastbound traffic just West of 99E. (b) Channelize Eastbound lanes just West of 99E, the left lane should be for vehicles making left turns only, the right lane should be for right turns and Southbound traffic. (c) Investigate an alternative parking pattern for the head - in parking on the North side, just East of 99E. Modify the NE corner to eliminate truck turning problems. (d) Move the "Speed Limit 55" sign for Eastbound traffic East of Bird's Eye further East to just beyond the curve. Cur- rently this sign is placed just prior to a curve sign with a 35 mph advisory speed. The 35 mph and 55 mph signs are in conflict. 4. Garfield Street (a) Raise the height of the "Stop" sign for Eastbound traffic at Front Street so it can be seen above the parked cars and/or install rubber "Stop" mat in street. 5. Lincoln Street (a) Paint a centerline for about 200 feet East of 99E. 6. Front Street (a) Investigate the need for an additional "To I-5" directional sign on the right for Southbound traffic at the OR 214 con- nector ramp. (b) The "Do Not Enter" sign facing traffic turning from North- bound to Westbound at the OR 214 connector ramp could cause confusion and make some motorists think the connector is one way. Suggest the use of channelization to separate oppossing flows with a "Keep Right" sign in the median. (c) Install "Pavement Narrows" sign for Southbound traffic just South of OR 214. 41 7. Settlemier Avenue (a) Install a "Stop Ahead" sign for Southbound traffic at Front Street. 8. Maple Street (a) Install "Stop" sign at corner of Maple Street and Smith Drive. 9. Install "Stop" signs at the corners of Astor Way and Rainier, Sallal, Thompson, Umpqua, Astor Court and Walton Way. 10. Pavement markings on all major streets and pedestrian walkways should be inventoried annually to verify that they are still visible and/or in need of repair or replacement. F. ACCESS CONTROL 1. New direct access to arterials should be granted only after consideration is given to the land use and traffic patterns in the area of development, not just at the specific site. Frontage roads and access collection points shall be imple- mented wherever feasible. 2. Access control techniques will be used to coordinate traffic and land use patterns and to help mi.nimize the negative impacts of growth. Area -wide needs should receive precedence over site- specific needs. 3. To insure a minimization of traffic flow and to promote safety; the number of access points to arterials shall be kept to a mini- mum; the cluster development of commercial and industrial acti- tivities will be encouraged; and the City shall establish minimum set backs from the public right-of-way of arterails for commercial and industrial uses. 4. Undeveloped lands in which new arterial alignments are planned should receive special consideration for the use of the various access control techniques. These lands have both the greatest need and greatest potential for access control. G. MAINTAINING ACCIDENT STATISTICS H. PARKING I. The City should analyze and maintain, on an annual basis, acci- dent statistics in order to monitor hazardous conditions at inter- sections and on streets. 1. In order to provide effecient movement of traffic, parking on an arterial should not be allowed or allowed only on a limited basis. 2. Local and collector streets should be designed to allow parking for limited periods of time, without interfering with traffic flow and/or accessability. v A? 3. Section 2 Subsection 4 of Ordinance Number 1902, "An ordinance prohibiting parking certain motor vehicles on City streets", should be amended to read: "A vehi- cle upon a designated parkway, arterial or freeway, except as authorized." I. TRANSIT SYSTEM 1. The City shall continue to operate and maintain the public transit service, with the support of the community, to pro- vide an alternative transportation mode. 2. The City shall maintain a Transit Development Program to insure appropriate improvement and development of the tran- sit system. J. BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PLAN See policy statements within the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. K. ENERGY AVAILABILITY 1. In the event of restrictions on fuel availability the City should be prepared to consider alternative energy plans in order to maintain desired service levels at an affordable price. L. FUNDING SOURCES The City shall pursue the procurement of funding sources for continual transportation system improvement. M. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION & AMENDMENT PROCEDURES I. In addition to biennial Comprehensive Plan review in which all elements are reviewed, the Transportation Plan shall be reviewed every five years to monitor changing transportation patterns and the plan shall be updated and revised every ten years in its entirety. The Transportation Plan may be amended during the review process or by special request via the public hearing process. 43 APPENDIX I STREET & HIGHWAY INVENTORY PAVED PAVEMW.T SIDE STREET FROM TO 1Z /W f Tt* it i.i AT 47e Acacia Ptyrt_e Ced.ar 50' 33' ^air Yes 'No Alder Linda Steven 40' 20' Good Yes Yes Alexandria City Shops 99E 60' 33' Fair Yes Some Alexandria __.City Shops Park 50' Uaved No No Alexandria Ct. Alexandria End 50' 29' 1 Good Yes Yes Amy Ct. Tierra Lynn End 50' 26' Fair Yes No Arthur First Front 57.5' 35' Poor Yes Yes Arthur Settlemier Third 57.5' 26' Fair Yes No Astor Way Highway 214 Country Club 60' 48' Fair Yes No Astor Way Country Club Vander - beck 60' 34' Fair Yes No Audrey Cooley End 60' 33' Good Yes Some Austin McLaughlin Smith 60' 34' Fair Yes No Aztec 99E End 60' 34' -very Good Yes Some Arney Highway 214 UGB 80' 28' Fair No No Ben Brown Settlemier Elana 45' paved No No Birds Eye Silverton R.R. 50' 36' Fair Yes Some Blaine Gatch 99E 40' 25' 1 Fair Yes No Boones Ferry Highway 214 UGB 60' 20' Poor No No Bradley -Ogle Brown 40' Uaved No No Brandywine Ct. Elana End 50' 33' Fair Yes Yes Broadway 'D' Street 'C' St. 60' 25' 1 Poor Yes No Broadway R.R. 'C' St. 60' 36' Good Yes Some Broughton Highway 214 Sallal 60' 34' Fair Yes No Brown Ct. Brown End 50' 34' Fair Yes No Brown Bradley UGB 40' Un ved No No Brown Cleveland Bradley 40' 26' Fair Some Some Bryan Blaine Lincoln 40' 30' Fair Yes Some Bryan Young Johnson 44' 30' Poor Yes Yes Camellia Dogwood Mulberry 60' Not Developed Cahill Way Rainier Sallal 50' 30' Fair Yes No Carol Lincoln cashe 40' 35' Fair Yes No S.Cascade W.Hayes Santiam 60' 34' Fair Yes No N.Cascade W.Ha es Hwy. 214 60' 34' Fair Yes No Cedar M rtle Acacia 50' 34' Fair Yes No Charles Ct. Corby End 50' 34' Poor Yes No Cherr Front End 50' U aved No No STREET Church Church FROM Settlemier Settlemier TO Leasure Fifth R/W 60' 60' PAVED WIDTH 34' 28' PAVEMENT CONDITION Fair Fair e CURBS Yes Yes SIDE WALKS No Some Church FirstSecond 60' Un- X, No No Clackamas Cir. W.Hayes End 34' Fair Yes No Cleveland Settlemier Firs First 60' 26' Fair Yes Some Cleveland Cleveland FrontBrown Brown 99E 40' 60' 20' 21' Poor Poor Some Some Some Some Columbia Santiam W.Ha es 34' Fair Yes No Cooley Hardcastle ....Hwy. 211 60' 20' Poor Some Some Corby Hardcastle Lincoln 50' 26' Fair Yes Some Country Club Cir. Country Club End 60' 34' Fair Yes No County Club Ct. Country Club End 60' 34' Fair Yes No Country Club Rd. Boones Ferry Astor 60' 23' Fair No No Country Club Rd. Hwy. 214 Astor 60' 34' Fair Yes No Country Cl. Terr. o r d 60' 34' Fair Yes No Cupids Ct. Lincoln End 40' paved No No Deer Run Meadowvale End 50' 34' Fair Yes No Dellmore Rainier Walton 60' 34' Fair Yes No Dogwood Umpqua Astor 60' 34' Good Yes No Dunn Hardcastle End 60' 30' Poor Yes No Doud Young Lincoln 40' 26' Fair Yes Some E.Hayes FrontDoud 50' paved No No Ecola Princeton Sallal 50' 26' Fair Yes No Elana Elm Parr Johnson Ben Brown paovemengf 60' 50' 34' 36' Fair Fair Yes Yes Yes No Evergreen Hwy. 214 W.Ha es 90' 40' Fair Yes No Filbert Marion Johnson 50' 30' Fair Yes No Finzer Princeton Umpqua 60' 34' Fair Yes No Fir H . 214 Fifth 60' 15' Poor No No Front Front Parr Rd. Cleveland Cleveland casele 40' 55' 20' 40' Poor Poor No Yes Some Some Front Front Front Hardcastle Cemetar High School Cemetar gg NSc.otol limit 55' 50' 50' 20' 40' 20' Poor Fair Fair No No No No No No Garden Way Astor Umpqua 60' 34' Fair Yes No Garfield First Settlemier 60' 26' Good Yes Yes Garfield Front First 60' 36' Good Yes Yes PAVED PAVEMENT SIDE STREET FROM TO R/W WTDTH' CONDTTTON (.TTRi2C WAT.KC Garfield Settlemier Smith 60' 34' Fair Yes No Gatch Cleveland Young 40' 20' Good Yes Some Gatch Lincoln casfle 50' 34' Fair Yes No Gatch Young Lincoln 40' 25' Poor Yes Yes George 99E Chsentian- 50' 30' Fair Yes Yes Greenview Hardcastle Audrey 60' 34' Good Yes Some Greenview Ct. Greenview End 50' 34' Good Yes Yes Grant Front Second 60' 36' Good Yes Yes Grant Second Fifth 60' 26' Fair Yes Yes Hall Church W.Hayes 60' 34' Fair Yes No Hampton Way Umpqua Astor 60' 34' Good Yes No E.Hardcastle 99E Cooley 60' 20' Poor No No Hardcastle Front 99E 40' 26' Poor Yes Some Harrison Front First 60' 34' Fair Yes Yes Harrison First Settlemier 60' 26' Fair Yes Yes Hawthorne Cir. Willow End ' 20' Fair Yes Yes Hawley Wilson Cleveland 40' 33' Fair Yes Yes Hermanson Wilson vaie°W- 60' y34' Good Yes No Hermanson Stark Wilson 50' 34' Fair Yes No Heather Dogwood Mulberry 60' Not Developed Heritage Hardcastle End 60' 34' Fair Yes Some High Hwy. 214 Fifth 60' 26' Fair Yes Some Industrial Ave. Progress Way 99E 90' 44' Good Yes No James Park 99E 60' 33' Poor Yes No Jana Ave. Stark Wilson 60' 34' Fair Yes Yes Jana Ct. Stark End 60' 34' Fair Yes Yes Jansen Way Umpqua Umpqua 60' 34' Fair Yes No Johnson Gatch Elm 50' 30' Fair Yes No Joyce Marion Johnson 50' 26' Poor Yes No Judy 50' 33' Fair Yes Yes Julie Ct. Judy End 50' 29' Fair Yes Yes June Ct. June Way Audrey 50' 34' Good Yes No June June Way June Ct. Pa 60' 34' Good Yes Some Kelowna Parr Ben Brown 50' 34' Fair Yes No Kelowna Ct. Parr End 50' 34' Fair Yes Yes Kennedy Hardcastle End 40' 36' Poor Yes Yes Kevin Ct. Tierra Lynn End 50' 26' Fair Yes No PAVED PAVEMENT SIDE STREET FROM Tn u AJ WTnTu f nNDTTTnN rTTDRC MAT VC King Way Umpqua End 60' 34' Fair Yes No Koffler Queen City End 50' 29' Fair Yes No Kotka W.Lincoln End 60' 34' Good Yes Some Landau Dr. Tomlin End 50'/29' 33'/20' Good Yes Some Leasure W.Ha es H_Wy'214 60' 34` Fair Yes No E. Lincoln 99E End 50' 34'/221 Fair Some No E.Lincoln Front Gatch 50' 26' Good Yes Yes E.Lincoln Gatch 99E 50' 34' Good Yes Some W.Lincoln Front First 60' 36' very Good Yes Yes W.Lincolxi Settlemier' Cascade 60' 34' Fair Yes No W.Lincoln Settlemier First 60' 26' Good Yes Yes Lilac Do wood Mulberry 60' Not Developed Linda Willow Woodland 40' 46' Fair Some I Some Maple Settlemier Smith 60' 34' Fair Yes No Mar Cel Tierra Lynn y Ma Cel �t. 60' 34' Poor Yes Some Mar Cel Ct. Mat Cel Dr. End' 50' 30' Fair Yes No Marshall Cleveland Wilson 40' 30' Fair Yes No Marion Filbert Joyce 50' 30' Fair Yes No Marion Joyce Bryan 50' 26' Fair Yes No Marion Audrey End 60` 34' Good Yes Some McDonald Hwy 214 End 60' 34' Good Yes Yes McLaughlin Smith Austin 60' 34' Good Yes Yes McKinley 99E End 40' 30' Poor Yes No McKnaught Woodland Willow 40' 27' Fair No No Meadowvale Hermansoin Hermanson 50' 34' Good Yes Some Meridian Hwy. 214 End 60' 40' Good Yes Yes Mill St. Front Corby 50' In No No Montgomery First mierle 60' 25' Fair Yes Yes Myrtle Willow Woodland 60' 34' Fair Yes No National Way 90' 34' Good Yes No Newport Way Umpqua King Way 60' 34' Fair Yes No Oak Settlemier Front 50' 26' Fair Yes Some le Cleveland err 20' pa0Foones ved No No Olive Myrtle Palm 50' 34' Fair Yes No Orchard Ln. E.Hardcastle End 60' 34' Good Yes Yes Oregon Ct. Oregon Way End 50' 34' Fair Yes No Oregon Way Hwy. 214 W.Ha es 60' 34' Fair Yes No Oswald Doud Tooze 50' paved I I Some I Some STREET FROM TO R /W PAVED PAVEMENT WTDTB MNDTTTnN SIDE (`TTRRR CTAT TIC Palm Myrtle Olive 50' 34' Fair Yes No Park -Hwy. 214 cas�le 60' 36' Good Yes Yes Park Lincoln casgle 60' 34' Good Yes No Park Cir. Park Park 60' 34' Fair Yes Some Park View Ct. Park End 60' 34' Fair Yes Some Parr Front C iimYits 60' 22' Fair Some No Payne 'A' St. Brown 40' paved No No Poplar Settlemier Third 50' paved Princeton Rainier UIc er 60' 34'` Fair Yes No Progress Way Hwy. 214 trial— 90' 44' Good Yes No Queen City Hardcastle End 40' paved No Some Quinn Ct. Finzer End 50' 34' Fair Yes No Quinn Rd. Princeton �yuctrY 50' 34' Fair Yes No Rainier Cou try Cl. 60' 34' Fair Yes No Randolph Rainier Cmooie C�uctrY 60' 34' Fair Yes No R.J.Glatt Cir. Meridian 60' 34' Good Yes Yes Sallal Astor vMeridian becer 60' 34' Fair Yes No Sallal Ct. Sallal End 50' 30' Fair Yes No Santiam Columbia Cascade 5p° 34' Fair Yes No Seneca Ct. Stark End 50' 29' Fair Yes No Settlemier Hwy. 214 Lincoln 60' 38 Good Yes Yes Settlemier Lincoln Arthur 60' 32' Good Yes Yes Settlemier Arthur mierlPk-. 60' 28' Good Yes Yes Settlemier Varklemier Parr Rd. 60' 34' Good Yes Some Shlith Workman McLI Rh 60' 34' Good Yes No Smith Workman W.Ha es 60' 34' Good Yes No Standfield Rainier �yuctrY 60' 34' Fair Yes No Stark Marshall Hesonn 50' 30' Fair Yes Yes Stark Brown 0 le 50' 33' Fair Yes No Stark Brown Marshall 50' 34' Fair Yes No Stark Ct. Stark End 50' 34' Fair Yes No Steven Willow Woodland 40' 28' Fair Some Some Sycamore Myrtle Willow 60' 34' Fair Yes No Tierra Lynn Hardcastle James 60' 34' Fair Yes No Tierra Lynn James H .214 60' 34' Fair Yes Some Tierra Lynn Ct. Tierra Lynn End 50' 30' 1 Fair Yes No Tierra Ct. Tierra Lynn End 50' 30' Fair Yes No Thompson Vanderbeck End 60'+50' 34' Fair Yes No STREET Tomlin Tooze Tout Umpqua Umpqua Umpqua Place Umpqua Ct. Vanderbeck Van Lieu Ct. Walton WayRuatry Warren Way W.Hayes W.Hayes W.Hayes W.Hayes W.Hayes W.Hayes Williams Willow Willow Wilson Wilson Woodland Woodland Workman Yew Youn FROM 99E Youn Settlemier Kin WayUawport Vanderbeck Um qua Umpqua Sallal Alexandra Meadowvale Ever reen Cascade Nellie Muir Leasure Settlemier Second 99E McNau ht H .214 Brown Marshall McNau ht H .214 Smith Third Front TO Landau Oswald Front Astor End End Astor End Astor End Cascade NN nellie uir Leasure Settlemier Second Front Carol Woodland McNaught Marshall Hawle Willow McNau ht Garfield Second 99E PAVED R/W WIDTH ppf 55 � 5& 45 26' 40' Un 60r Un- aved 60' 34' 60' 34' 60' 34' 60' 34' 60' 34' 50' 29' 60' 34' 50' 34' 60' 34' 50' 32 50' 28' 60' ' 32 60' 25' 60' 34' 50' 30' 40'/45' 30' 80' 40' 50' paved 50' 32' 40'/45' 30'/24'1 80' 40' 60' 34' 50' Uaved 60' 40' PAVEMENT CONDITION FF Goo/ Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Good Fair Fair Fair Good Good Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Good CURBS Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Some Some Yes Yes Yes Yes Some Yes No Yes Some Some Yes No Yes SIDE WALKS Yes No No No No No No No No No No No No Some Some Yes Yes No Some No No Some No No No No Yes Astor Ct. or, Way r E.Hayes Frontage Mulberry Tooze Hwy.214 Heather Doud End Astor 60' 60' 60' paved 30' Fair Not Developed No No No No Railroad Ave. Silverton Ave. Smith Ct. Stark James Ave. Woodcrest Ct. Mill 99E Smith Marshall Alexandra Front End 40' Hwy.214 60' End 50' Jana Ct. 50' 99E 60' End 501/40' Uaved 28' 29' 34' 33' 29' Fair Fair Good Poor No Some Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Some No Yes PAVED STREET FROM TO u /m TJTnTu PAVEMENT SIDE (nMn T`PT nM (`TTDDQ T.TAT T7c 'A' St. Cleveland Stark 20' Uaved NoyV Noy`U 'A' St. Stark Bradley 40' Uaved No No 'A' St. Young Broadway 40' 29' Fair Yes No 'B' St. Cleveland Young 40' 24' Good Yes Some 'C' St. Young Broadway 40' 21' Good Yes Some 'D' St. Young Broadway 40' 25' Fair Yes No First Harrison End 60' 26' Fair Yes Yes First Oak Harrison 60' 35' Good Yes Yes Second Oak Momer 60' 25' Fair Yes Some Second Montgomery Grant 60' 34' 1 Good Yes Yes Second Lincoln End 60' 26' Fair Yes Yes Third Cleveland End 60' 26' Poor' Yes Yes Fourth Garfield Harrison 60' 26' Poor Yes Some Fifth Harrison H .214 60' 20' Fair No No Fifth Harrison Lincoln 40' 18' Poor Yes Some Fifth Lincoln Garfield 60' 25' Fair Yes Some Fifth Hwy.214 ChurchDrivewa 60' 39' Fair Yes Some Sixth Harrison End 60' 25' Fair Yes Some OR.Hwy.211 99E t YimittN 60' 24' Fair No No OR.Hwy.214 E.Cit Limits 60' Varies Fair Some Some OR.Hwy.99E N.City Limits gYiICIM limit 80' Varies Fair Some Some APPENDIX 11 STREET I A Brown Bryan Cahill Way Carol S. Cascade N. (-asnade Cedar Charles Ct. J CD Z . `� r O� O O O LL U �-. :Z- U` O Z W U JN Z J ZuiQ W Z�c�V) H-cNO�E Y¢ ;zmY ¢'Z Ne c) AL O W Q Q J Q O 4 J 0 Q J Z CL z an STREET Cherry Church Clackamas Ci Cleveland Columbia Country Club Terr. Cupids Ct. _er Run E. Hayes Ecola Elana Elm Evergreen Filbert Finzer Frc,n Garden W L L X x in w 3 Z O Z 3 O C7J N ZWOZ O W U' pOcn YQ •+3.. YOF— __cLn , NW �� Q O 4' J a- Of J W Q --i O <L J Z X X X X X STREET Garfield Gatch Greenview Greenview Ct. Hampton Hardcastle Harrison Hawthorne Hawley H ianson O LL U C7 O `+v)Z ZW H -NO �, U V) " Y Q3 q c J MA C L L X L X L L X L X MA C L L X L X L_ X JohnsonILL tx Joyce Jud Julie Ct. t' 9 X N w w 3 Z O Z 3 O C7 J N CD p Z O w ^ CO CD C] YQ O 2=Uj Y O O W Q O � J o Q J O J W Q J Z X 9 X N w STREET M Marion McDonald McLaughlin McKinley McKnanaht National W P—goort Wa O Lt U C7 ' ' Z Z [ I— to C:) t -r U V) Y C �¢QQ Q- L X L X L X L X L X X MA L x L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X X m W Z 3 O O N Z W O Of of Q O Q J O X I N Queen City J Q J Z -+ Quinn Ct. O LI- U t . f Z Quinn Rd. F- N O STREET ¢ Q Q Olive L Orchard Lane L Oregon Ct. L —.Oregon Way L Oswald L Palm L Park C Park Cir. L Park View Ct. L Parr MA Poplar L Queen City L Quinn Ct. L Quinn Rd. L Railroad L Rainier L Randolph L R.J.Glatt Cir. L Sallal i SP+ X D X 3 X Z 3 U' O C7 JO OZ N ODZ O W Z W W 2' W .-. UJ Y O _ZJ Y d rZi _O -CD N ck� J of F-- Y O 1-- fY .J CL' Y O W = W <J Q O Q.J O _.1 Q J Z X C a- n � r -I X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X STREET Smith Ct. Stanfield Stark Stark Ct. Steven Syramore r n Ct Tooze Tout ua Umpqua P1 Umpqua Ct Vanderbeck Van Lieu Ct. 4alton Wav naves J p CDLL- C) 00 I-- cn O Zr W L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X L X C X L X L X C L X C Y X Z O Z 3 O Cn �7pZ 27ppv) -M ~"C:) Y O C:) zw.. Y03c� (Y Q A O Q J Z STREET - C) LA- +h -Z vU)C) 2= �?—�¢¢ Zw —:1e c:> a� ¢—� w O c0 .i 2---jZ ~¢ �►— ¢o Z to c9 in z WO .q -'c . rr�o~C a-�o Z 3 ^ w CD o o V) ZLLJ ^ r 3 N �_jww -cc Iz YoungMA X "A" L X "B" L X lig" L X "D" L X First L X Second L W Third L W Fourth L W Fifth W Sixth NW