Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Public Workshop Meeting #3<br />December 8,  2010<br />
2<br />Meeting Agenda<br />Project Update<br />Overview of Tech Memos 3.2 and 6.1<br />Update on Tech Memos 4.1 and 4.3<br...
Project Process<br />WE ARE HERE<br />
Technical Memorandum 3.2 Overview<br />Project Purpose and Need<br />Project Goals and Objectives<br />By Key Elements<br ...
Purpose of This Project<br />Address corridor congestion and safety problems <br />Serve future north-south traffic<br />S...
Key Project Elements<br />   Project Implementation<br />   Corridor Alignment<br />   Land Use/ Transportation Integratio...
Corridor Alignment Goals<br />Improve mobility for:<br />Through traffic  <br />Local community <br />Freight traffic<br /...
Streetscape Cross Section Goals<br />Provide an aesthetically pleasing design. . . <br />That supports the character of th...
Technical Memorandum 4.1 and 4.3 Update<br />Existing Transportation Conditions<br />Added Six Intersections North of the ...
Technical Memorandum 6.1 Overview<br />Relevant Design Standards<br />Clackamas County<br />City of Damascus<br />City of ...
Roadway Cross-Section Standards<br />Lane width requirements <br /><ul><li>Travel lane – 11-12 feet
Center turn lane – 12-14 feet
Bike lanes – 6 feet on both sides
Sidewalks – 6-8 feet
Landscape strip – 5-7 feet</li></ul>Source: City of Happy Valley TSP<br />
Roadway Standards<br />Classification: Minor Arterial<br />Design Speed<br />Main Corridor: 35-40 mph<br />Village Centers...
Collectors: 500 Feet
Local Roads: 250 Feet</li></li></ul><li>13<br />Alternatives Development Process<br />WE ARE HERE<br />
Technical Memorandum #6.2 Overview<br />Alignment Concepts<br />61 Sketches Created<br />Two Solution Types Emerged (Syste...
Alignment Concepts (System Plans)<br />8 System Concepts<br />Utilize New and Existing East-West, North-South Grid System ...
Alignment Concepts             (Transitional Plans)<br />10 Concepts<br />Continuous Southwest to Northeast Connections be...
Cross-Section Concepts        (Symmetrical)<br />Same features on both sides of Centerline<br />11 Concepts<br />
Cross-Section Concepts (Offset)<br />Unbalanced Geometric Configurations<br />7 Concepts (Not Recommended)<br />
Evaluation of Alignments (Pros/Cons)<br />
Evaluation of Alignments (Scoring)<br />
Preliminary Corridor Alignment Recommendations<br />Recommended for Further Review<br /><ul><li>5 Concepts (AT2, AT4, AT6,...
Preliminary Streetscape Cross-Section Recommendations<br />Recommended for Further Review<br /><ul><li>Meets Bike/Pedestri...
11 Concepts</li></ul>Recommended for NO Further Review<br /><ul><li>Does not Meet Bike/Pedestrian Standards
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Public Workshop #3

370

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
370
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Public Workshop #3"

  1. 1. Public Workshop Meeting #3<br />December 8, 2010<br />
  2. 2. 2<br />Meeting Agenda<br />Project Update<br />Overview of Tech Memos 3.2 and 6.1<br />Update on Tech Memos 4.1 and 4.3<br />Summary of Workshop #2 Concepts <br />Alignments and Streetscapes<br />Work Session to Evaluate and Recommend Concept for Further Review <br />Public Comments<br />Next Steps <br />
  3. 3. Project Process<br />WE ARE HERE<br />
  4. 4. Technical Memorandum 3.2 Overview<br />Project Purpose and Need<br />Project Goals and Objectives<br />By Key Elements<br />Project Evaluation Criteria<br />By Key Elements<br />
  5. 5. Purpose of This Project<br />Address corridor congestion and safety problems <br />Serve future north-south traffic<br />Serve expected population growth in the area<br />Damascus <br />Happy Valley <br />Pleasant Valley Plan area <br />Gresham<br />Serve the growing demand for regional travel<br />
  6. 6. Key Project Elements<br /> Project Implementation<br /> Corridor Alignment<br /> Land Use/ Transportation Integration <br /> Streetscape Features<br />
  7. 7. Corridor Alignment Goals<br />Improve mobility for:<br />Through traffic <br />Local community <br />Freight traffic<br />Minimize impacts to:<br />Environmental resources <br />Cultural resources<br />Social <br />Provide flexibility for:<br />Changing socio-economic conditions <br />Development opportunities<br />
  8. 8. Streetscape Cross Section Goals<br />Provide an aesthetically pleasing design. . . <br />That supports the character of the adjoining land uses<br />That preserves rural character<br />Integrate “green streets” design with the natural features <br />Improve safety for all users <br />Support healthy and walkable communities <br />
  9. 9. Technical Memorandum 4.1 and 4.3 Update<br />Existing Transportation Conditions<br />Added Six Intersections North of the Study Area<br />Updated Intersection Peak Hour Volumes<br />Conducted Daily Traffic Counts on 172nd and 190th<br />No Significant Operational Changes<br />Future Transportation Conditions (Year 2035)<br />Change in Mitigation Requirement at One Intersection<br />Roundabout/Signal at 172nd/Vogel<br />Financially Constrained Improvements Assumed for Six New Study Intersections<br />Additional Improvements Required at Three New Study Intersections<br />
  10. 10. Technical Memorandum 6.1 Overview<br />Relevant Design Standards<br />Clackamas County<br />City of Damascus<br />City of Gresham<br />City of Happy Valley<br />Metro<br />Project Goals and Objectives<br />Context Sensitive Design Approach and Changes for the 172nd Corridor<br />
  11. 11. Roadway Cross-Section Standards<br />Lane width requirements <br /><ul><li>Travel lane – 11-12 feet
  12. 12. Center turn lane – 12-14 feet
  13. 13. Bike lanes – 6 feet on both sides
  14. 14. Sidewalks – 6-8 feet
  15. 15. Landscape strip – 5-7 feet</li></ul>Source: City of Happy Valley TSP<br />
  16. 16. Roadway Standards<br />Classification: Minor Arterial<br />Design Speed<br />Main Corridor: 35-40 mph<br />Village Centers: 25-35 mph<br />Roadway Grade<br />1%-8% Typical<br />10% Residential<br />Intersection Spacing Standards<br /><ul><li>Arterials: 1000 Feet
  17. 17. Collectors: 500 Feet
  18. 18. Local Roads: 250 Feet</li></li></ul><li>13<br />Alternatives Development Process<br />WE ARE HERE<br />
  19. 19. Technical Memorandum #6.2 Overview<br />Alignment Concepts<br />61 Sketches Created<br />Two Solution Types Emerged (System/Transition)<br />18 Unique Concepts were Developed<br />Cross-Section Concepts<br />28 Sketches Created<br />Two Solution Types Emerged (Symmetrical/Offset)<br />2-Lane/3-Lane/4-Lane/5-Lane<br />18 Unique Concepts were Developed<br />
  20. 20. Alignment Concepts (System Plans)<br />8 System Concepts<br />Utilize New and Existing East-West, North-South Grid System to Connect 172nd and 190th<br />
  21. 21. Alignment Concepts (Transitional Plans)<br />10 Concepts<br />Continuous Southwest to Northeast Connections between 172nd and 190th<br />
  22. 22. Cross-Section Concepts (Symmetrical)<br />Same features on both sides of Centerline<br />11 Concepts<br />
  23. 23. Cross-Section Concepts (Offset)<br />Unbalanced Geometric Configurations<br />7 Concepts (Not Recommended)<br />
  24. 24. Evaluation of Alignments (Pros/Cons)<br />
  25. 25. Evaluation of Alignments (Scoring)<br />
  26. 26. Preliminary Corridor Alignment Recommendations<br />Recommended for Further Review<br /><ul><li>5 Concepts (AT2, AT4, AT6, AS4, AS9)</li></ul>Under Consideration for NO Further Review<br /><ul><li>9 Concepts (AT1, AT5, AT7, AT8, AS2, AS5, AS7, AS8, AS10)</li></ul>Recommended for NO Further Review<br /><ul><li>4 Concepts (AT3, AS1, AS3, AS6)</li></li></ul><li>PAC Suggested Modifications<br />Move AS4 from “Recommended” to“Not Recommended”<br />Move AT7 from“Not Recommended” to“Recommended”<br />Modify AS10 alignment away from Butte (See AS10A)<br />
  27. 27. Preliminary Streetscape Cross-Section Recommendations<br />Recommended for Further Review<br /><ul><li>Meets Bike/Pedestrian Standards
  28. 28. 11 Concepts</li></ul>Recommended for NO Further Review<br /><ul><li>Does not Meet Bike/Pedestrian Standards
  29. 29. 7 Concepts</li></li></ul><li>Let’s Get Your Input<br />Posters for Alignment Concepts<br /><ul><li>Future Land Use/Environmental Constraints
  30. 30. Pros/Cons
  31. 31. Scores</li></ul>Posters for Streetscape Concepts<br />Use “Notes” Section of Your Handout to Provide Feedback<br />Today’s Goal is to narrow the Alignment and Streetscape groups to 5 concepts each and provide recommendations to the PMT<br />
  32. 32. Workbook<br />
  33. 33. Scorecard<br />
  34. 34. Next Steps<br />Process Feedback from PAC, Virtual Workshop #3, and Public Workshop #3 (December 8)<br />PMT to Meet December 16th to narrow the 18 Corridor Alignment and Streetscape Concepts Down to 5 for Further Review<br />Report back to PAC and the public regarding the PMT’s recommendations for concepts to be further reviewed in the next round<br />
  35. 35. Thanks!<br />
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×