Public Workshop #4

  • 348 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
348
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Public Workshop Meeting #4
    March 30th, 2011
  • 2. 2
    Meeting Agenda
    Project Recap
    Project Update
    Summary of Workshop #3 Concepts
    Overview of Tech Memo 7.1
    Work Session to Select and Refine Concepts for Further Review
    Public Comment Period
    Next Steps
    Key Goal: Identify 3 Most Promising Roadway Alignment Alternatives
  • 3. 3
    Project Background Video
  • 4. 4
    Project Website/Virtual Workshop (http://172nd.com)
  • 5. 5
    Project Purpose Statement
    The purpose of this project is to effectively address the 172nd-190th corridor congestion and safety problems, serve future north-south traffic, serve expected population growth in Damascus, Happy Valley, the Pleasant Valley Plan Area and Gresham, and to serve the growing demand for regional travel.
  • 6. Project Process
    WE ARE HERE
  • 7. 7
    Alternatives Development Process
    WE ARE HERE
  • 8. 8
    Pubic Involvement Recap
    • Workshop #1 – August 18th, 2010
    • 9. Introduce Background and Project Purpose
    • 10. Workshop #2 - October 6th, 2010
    • 11. Develop Corridor Alignment and Streetscape Concepts
    • 12. Workshop #3 - December 8th, 2010
    • 13. Screen Corridor Alignment and Streetscape Concepts to 3 Alternatives
    • 14. Workshop #4 – March 30th, 2011
    • 15. Review and Comment on Preferred Corridor Alternatives,
  • 9
    Schedule (cont.)
    Open House
    July 13th, 2011
    Review and Comment on Preferred Corridor Plan
    Public Hearings
    • Fall 2011 – County Planning Commission
    • 16. December 2011 – Damascus Planning Commission
    • 17. January 2012 – Happy Valley Planning Commission
    • 18. January 2012 – Damascus City Council
    • 19. February 2012 – Happy Valley City Council
    • 20. Winter 2012 – Board of County Commissioners
  • Key Project Elements
  • 21. Initial Corridor Alignment Recommendations Prior to Public Workshop #3
    Recommended for Further Review
    • 5 Concepts (AT2, AT4, AT6, AS4, AS9)
    Under Consideration for NO Further Review
    • 9 Concepts (AT1, AT5, AT7, AT8, AS2, AS5, AS7, AS8, AS10)
    Recommended for NO Further Review
    • 4 Concepts (AT3, AS1, AS3, AS6)
  • Corridor Alignment Modifications Per Public Input
  • 22. Initial Corridor Alignment Recommendations Prior to Public Workshop #3
    Recommended for Further Review
    • 5 Concepts (AT2, AT4, AT6, AS4, AS9)
    Under Consideration for NO Further Review
    • 9 Concepts (AT1, AT5, AT7, AT8, AS2, AS5, AS7, AS8, AS10a)
    Recommended for NO Further Review
    • 4 Concepts (AT3, AS1, AS3, AS6)
  • Future Transportation Conditions (2035) Analysis Findings
    * Subject to change - further analysis needed.
  • 23. Project Evaluation Criteria
    Vehicular Mobility
    Multi-Modal Mobility
    Local Access
    Multi-Modal Safety
    Impacts to Natural Environment
    Impacts to Built Environment
    Land Use Compatability
    Cost (Construction Only)
    Aesthetic Character
  • 24. Alignment Concepts – AT2
  • 25. Alignment Concepts – AT4
  • 26. Alignment Concepts – AT5
  • 27. Alignment Concepts – AT6
  • 28. Alignment Concepts – AS10a
  • 29. Evaluation Scores
  • 30. Preliminary Corridor Alignment Recommendations
    Recommended for Further Review
    • 3Concepts (AT2, AT6, AS10a)
    Recommended for NO Further Review
    • 2Concepts (AT4, AT5)
  • Let’s Get Your Input
    Posters for Alignment Concepts
    • Future Land Use/Environmental Constraints
    • 31. Pros/Cons
    • 32. Scores
    Use “Notes” Section of Your Handout to Provide Feedback
    Today’s Goals are to:
    1) Narrow the Alignment Concepts to 3 Most Promising Alternatives
    2) Provide Suggested Refinements to the 3 Most Promising Alternatives
  • 33. Next Steps
    Process Feedback from PAC, Virtual Workshop #4, and Public Workshop #4
    PMT to narrow the 5 Corridor Alignment Concepts Down to the 3 Most Promising Alternatives for Further Review
    Report back to PAC and the public regarding the PMT’s recommendations for concepts to be further reviewed in the next round
    Open House on July 13th, 2011 to review and comment on preferred corridor
  • 34. Thanks!