Interim Corridor Strategy Staff Report
An Element of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US Highway 26) Corridor Plan
Oregon Department of Transportation
Prepared by: ODOT Regions I & 2 Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. Paula Calvin Associntes Cogan Owens Cogan
October 1997 Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
Proposed Action
Endorsement of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Interim Corridor Strategy.
Background and Analysis
The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has been working with 18 local and regional governments, interest groups, statewide agencies and stakeholder committees, and the general public to develop a long-term plan for the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US Highway 26) Corridor.
The first phase of that process has resulted in the attached Interim Corridor Strategy. The Interim Corridor Strategy is a critical element of the Portland-Cannon-Beach Junction Corridor Plan. Corridor planning is a new approach to transportation planning statewide. ODOT and the communities bordering major transportation corridors have worked together to build a plan that not only addresses the specific needs of each corridor, but also identifies each corridor's current and future uses and unique character.
--""-' Astoria /L
I
Corridor Map.
file: us26/phusel /chprev stafSre2.doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
The Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor serves both urban and rural transportation needs. Though multi-modal, the corridor is dominated by auto use on US Highway 26 (US 26), which is part of the National Highway System. US 26 is one of two major tourist routes to the north coast and also provides the primary access from the Portland area to the Tillamook area through its connection to Wilson River Highway (OR 6).
In the urban or eastern portion (within the regional urban growth boundary) of the corridor, use of all transportation modes is increasing and expected to continue to increase over the life (20 years) of the Corridor Plan. In this portion, the Corridor has the following primary functions: Both an inter-city and intra-city commuter route; Major regional transit corridor, which will be focused on the Westside light rail system when completed; Access to major employment centers in Portland and Washington County, most notably a growing high-tech industry; Major freight movement within the urban growth boundary (UGB); and Connections to 1-5 (via 1-405 and Highway 21 7) and 1-84 (via 1-405).
Within its rural or western portion (outside the regional UGB), the Corridor is noted for the following: Linkage to north Oregon coast; Tourism and access to recreation opportunities; Rural scenic qualities, e.g. it is designated by Washington County as a Scenic Route; Natural resource amenities, particularly agricultural and forest lands and scenic rivers; Connection to other highways that serve rural communities and outlying cities such as Banks, North Plains, and Vemonia; and Freight movement for agricultural specialty crops, aggregate and forest products.
Assumptions
In developing the Interim Corridor Strategy, a number of assumptions were made related to other planning efforts, capital improvements, and other aspects of the transportation system. These assumptions, are not repeated as issues or objectives.
ODOT Corridor Staff and the ODOT Planning Staff are coordinating with Metro and local juridications to define and address growth management strategies in the Urban Growth Functional Plan for the urban or eastern portion of the corridor. Regional (as opposed to corridor-specific) transportation system issues and needs within the metropolitan urban growth boundary(UGB) are being addressed in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), which is a part of the Urban Growth Functional Plan.
Assumptions, based upon Metro's Region 2040 Growth Concept include significant population and employment growth focused on "Regional Centers" and "Town Centers"; limited UGB expansion; expanded transit services; and significant growth in local intra-city trips. Another
file: us26/phasel lchprev stafJre2. doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan element of the Metro planning effort is the development of a "Green Corridor" from the Metro UGB to North Plains (approximately 3 miles outside the UGB). The North Plains "Neighbor City" study is examining the potential impacts of regional growth management strategies on North Plains, including the need for urban growth boundary amendments.
The rural portions of the Corridor (west of the Metro UGB) are assumed to continue in resource uses, e.g . agriculture and forestry, with growth generally confined to acknowledged exception areas and existing rural community centers. The Inter& Corridor Strategy assumes the issues related to US 101 and its junction with US 26 have previously been addressed in the Coastal Highway Corridor Plan and will be further refined in the Highway 101 Scenic Byway study. Corridor plans for other state highways intersecting with US 26, e.g. Highway 47, will be prepared at a future time, although the functioning of these intersections is being addressed in this corridor plan.
The Interim Corridor Strategy assumes that all highway uses of US 26 will increase during the 20- year planning period. The use of US 26 as a primary route to the Tillarnook area via OR 6 will continually grow. The availability of "Tillarnook Bum" timber stands for harvesting will increase use of the US 26 corridor for logging operations and transport.
Highway capital improvement projects identified for construction in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) relating to US 26 are assumed as part of the Strategy. Projects previously identified by ODOT and local jurisdictions but not included in the STIP are not assumed.
Current funding constraints are not assumed. The purpose of the Corridor Plan is to establish objectives and priorities for the long-term management of and improvements to transportation facilities within the corridor, regardless of current funding limitations. The corridor objectives and priorities are balanced with a reasonable possibility of funding from a variety of sources over the 20 year planning period. The ability to implement these objectives and priorities will, of course, be dependent upon future available funding. One of the tasks in the next phase will be to determine the priorities of the improvements within three different financial scenarios.
Key Findings
The Interim Corridor Strategy for Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor consists of a series of objectives to enhance the corridor's ability to serve commute, recreational, and freight travel between Portland and the Cannon Beach Junction. Consistent with Oregon Transportation Plan objectives to promote a balanced multi-modal transportation system, the Interim Strategy promotes transportation demand management (TDM) and system management (TSM) strategies as the first course in addressing future needs in the corridor. These TDM and TSM strategies include the development of support facilities for transit and other non-motorized modes, as well as retaining railroad and air services as an effective means of transport.
file: ur26/phasel/chprev stafJre2.doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
A wide variety of objectives have been developed to address the various elements of the corridor's transportation system. The following are the key issues reflected in the Interim Corridor Strategy objectives.
Demand For Increased Capacity
The Interim Strategy recommends limited expansion in highway capacity within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary. The question of how far out to expand US 26 over the next 20 years is yet to be resolved. The Strategy recommends an investigation of highway widening to the UGB line. The investigation should determine if there is a need for additional highway capacity over the long term given the projections for population and employment growth and requirements to reduce reliance on the automobile. The question of highway widening will be resolved during the Metro RTP and the Urban Growth Functional Plan process.
The Strategy calls for increased reliance on transit and local street networks for intracity trips on US 26 to reduce the demand for increased capacity. The degree to which local jurisdictions will be willing to accommodate a shift of traffic from US 26 to local streets remains to be determined.
The Interim Strategy recommends no expansion in highway capacity outside the Metro UGB, except for climbinglpassing lanes and turning lanes. One of the most controversial issues is interchange improvements in areas outside of the Metro UGB. There has been strong public demand for action on the Jackson School Road intersection, improvements to the Glencoe Road interchange, adding ramps to the Gordon Road overpass and improving the Staleys Junction (OR47) intersection.
Staff position at this time is as follows: Interchange Im~rovements Jackson School Road Yes ENFonsi recommend interchange Glencoe Road Yes Local studies support interchange improvements Gordon Road No Does not meet OBQT standards
At-grade Intersechon Improvements Mountaindale Analyze in this fiscal year Staley's Junction Analyze in this fiscal year
These issues are to be resolved jointly by ODOT and the regional, county and cities TSFs within the context of the CSC next phase over the coming fiscal year.
Alternative Modes
The Interim Corridor Strategy emphasizes the need to achieve a balanced transportation system. Therefore, Strategy objectives recommend increased reliance on transit to accommodate additional trips within the Metro UGB area. The Interim Strategy recognizes that transit service from the coast to Portland has not proven to be financially viable and recommends that an analysis be conducted to determine the role ODOT should play in providing or subsidizing such service.
file: us26lphasel lchprev stme2.doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
The role of air freight is an important issue in this corridor. The Hillsboro Airport is likely to increase its air freight service, and have limited commuter air service. The Interim Strategy objectives support the protection of public use airports from land use encroachments.
Rail service in the corridor provides an important function of freight movement of bulk commodities and aggregate products. This function is expected to increase and become more significant economically to the region.
Truck freight movement within the Metro area at peak times is hampered by congestion, causing increased use of local street networks for truck traffic. US 26 is the truck freight route for movements to other modal connections. The Interim Corridor Strategy recognizes the key role of Cornelius Pass Road plays as a freight connector to US 30 and the Northwest Portland Industrial area. Within the corridor's rural (western) portion, the Interim Strategy recommends climbing and passing lanes to reduce highway congestion due to slow-moving vehicles and to reduce associated safety hazards
Reducing SOV Trips
The Interim Strategy objectives encourage the use of transportation demand management (TDM) and transportation system (TSM) measures to reduce the percentage of single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips in the Metro area. Increased growth in the Hillsboro area will likely result in the greatest increase in SOV trips within the corridor.
Access Managemenz
The Interim Strategy calls for the application of the most restrictive access management standards. This is not an issue within the Metro portion of the corridor in which US 26 is a controlled access facility. Within the rural portion of the corridor, particularly at the rural community centers along the highway, access management standards may be the subject of intense debate.
Land Uses
The Interim Strategy objectives eT <-Tiragea balanced transportation system that recognizes the importance of access to the entire ~~rte,supports acknowledged comprehensive land use plans, is sensitive to regional differences, and supports livability in urban and rural areas. ODOT is participating in the North Plains Neighbor City Study to ensure that any adverse effects on US 26 associated with major growth in North Plains are avoided or mitigated.
Development of the Corridor Strategy
This Interim Corridor Strategy has been developed with the active involvement of the 18 local and regional governments in the corridor, interest groups, statewide agency and stakeholder committees and the general public. Key opportunities for public and agency involvement have included:
pie: us26/phel/chprev staffre2. doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
Technical Committees Two technical committees have been created to identify preliminary issues, opportunities and constraints; develop draft corridor objectives for public review; and advise on the planning process. These include an Internal Review Team (IRT), composed of ODOT regional and district planners and engineers, and the Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG).
The CTAG has serves as a review and steering committee throughout the planning process. The CTAG is the primary author of the Interim Corridor Strategy. The CTAG is composed of representatives of ODOT, other state agencies and regional and local governments from the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor. CTAG jurisdictions and designated representatives include:
Multnomah County John Dorst Engineering Services Washington County Mark Brown Principal Planner Washington County Scott King Senior Planner Clatsop County Randy Trevillian Public Works Director Portland Steve Dotterer Transportation Planning Manager Beaverton Margaret Middleton City Planner Hillsboro Wink Brooks Planning Director Hillsboro Roy Gibson Public Works Director North Plains Gary Dougherty Director of Public Works North Plains Hank Drexel Mayor Banks Robert Pickett Recorder Cornelius John Greiner City Manager Forest Grove Ivan Burnett City Manager Forest Grove Carl Mawson Planning Director Vernonia Michael McAlvage City Manager Vemonia Fred Oviatt Clatsop County Sheriff Department Cannon Beach Rainmar Bart1 City Planner Cannon Beach John Williams City Manager Seaside Gene Miles City Manager Gearhart Dennis McNally Administrator Metro Terry Whistler Transportation Planner Tri-Met Joe Walsh Transit Development Port of Tillarnook Bay Jack Crider Manager Port of Portland Craig Smith Senior Aviation Planner Oregon Department of Bob Cortright TransportationlLand Use Planner Land Conservation and Development Oregon Department of Chris Friend Tillarnook State Forest Forestry ODOT Region I, District 2A Harold Lasley Manager ODOT Region I Fred Eberle & Tim Wilson Corridor Planners ODOT Region 2, District I Carl Wieseke Assistant Manager ODOT Region 2 John deTar & Dan Fricke Corridor Planners
file: us26/phasel /c/zprrv stafJre2.doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
NewslenerlSu wey A survey of corridor residents and other interested party was conducted through a newsletter mailing in September, 1995. The primary purpose of the survey was to identify issues and needs to be addressed in the corridor planning process. An August, 1996 newsletter and questionnaire solicited public input on key objectives from the recommended Interim Corridor Strategy.
Open Houses Open houses were conducted in the corridor in October, 1995, to provide information on the planning process and to solicit input on issues and needed improvements to the transportation system, and priorities for objectives. An additional round of open houses was held in September, 1996, to solicit public input on preliminary objectives and priorities to be addressed in the Interim Corridor Strategy.
Local Government/Stakeholder BrieBngs Briefings have been provided though out the Strategy development process to local government officials, local community planning organizations, and other interest groups by the ODOT Team or by jurisdictional staff who served on the CTAG.
Public Comment Public comment has been solicited throughout the planning process through newsletter survey responses, open houses, letters and phone call and have been incorporated into issues and objectives.
Local and Regional Coordination of Transportation Planning
In conformance with the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), transportation system plans (TSP) are currently being or will be developed for all cities, counties and metropolitan planning organizations within the corridor. ODOT is contributing staff and financial resources to these local efforts. Portions of the TSPs that impact the corridor will be incorporated into the Corridor Plan. This process will link the corridor plan objectives to local comprehensive plans and to Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan
Additional local transportation planning is being funded through transportation and growth management (TGM) grants jointly zdministrated by ODOT and the Department of Land Conservation and Development.
file: usZb/phasel lchprev srafre2. doc Staff Report Interim Corridor Strategy Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan
The following summarizes the status of these planning efforts:
Status Metro Metro is currently in the process of a major update of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) to meet new federal planning and air quality requirements. Regional transportationpolicies were adopted this winter as pan of the Urban Growth Management Functional Plan framework. meRTP is scheduled to be adopted in the Spring of 1998.
Clatsop County TSP started; corridor planning funding.
Columbia County TSP underway; com'dor planning finding.
Tillamook County No TSP work started; eligible for exemption.
Multnomah County TSP underway for NWportion of county; will address Cornelius Pass Road to Washington County boundary. TSP pam'ally funded with com'dor planning funding.
Washington County TSP scheduled to start in 1998; TGM grants for the Cornell Road Study and Cedar Mill Town Center. The county is completing (TGM grant) Light Rail Station Area plans and ordinances GRT).
Portland TSP is being prepared in phmes, with revisions to Tramponation Policy and Street Classifications undertaken in the$rsr phase.
Beaverton A TGM grant is assisting the City in preparing a TSP. TGM grants are funding development of the South Tektronix Neighborhood Plan and a Property Redevelopment Altemtive study for the downtown as part of the light rail extension. In addition, the city is in the process of developing ordinances for the Light Rail Station Areas.
Cornelius A TGM grant is finding the preparation of a Main Srreet District Plan.
Willsboro A TGM grant is assisting rhe City in preparing a TSP. TGM grants are funding development of a Main Street study and the Tanasbourne Village study. In addition, the city is completing planning and ordinances for the Light Rail Station Areas.
North Plains A Neighboring City Study is being funded through a TGM grant.
Forest Grove A TGM grant is funding preparation of a Town Center Plan.
Cannon Beach TPR exempt; preparing a Pedestrian Plan.
Seaside A TGM grant is assisting the City in preparing a TSP.
file: us26/phasel lchprev staffre2. doc Oregon
DEPARTMENT OF Interim Corridor Strategy TRANSPORTATION
August, 1997 Region 1
FILE CODE: Corridor Steering Committee Members
City of Beaverton City of HUsboro City of North Plains City of Banks An Element of the City of Cornelius Portland-Cannon Beach Junction .. City of Forest Grove City of Vernonia (US Highway 26) City of Cannon Beach Corridor Plan City of Seaside City of Gearhart City of Portland Port of TiUamook Bay Port of Portland Clatsop County Multnomah County Oregon Department of Transportation " Washington County Metro Tri-Me t OR Dept of Transportation OR Dept. of Land Conservation & Development OR Dept of Forestry
Prepared by: ODOT Regions I Ci 2 Parsons Brinckerhof Qua& Ci Douglas, Inc. Paula Calvin Associates Cogan Owens Cogan
123 NW Flanders Portland, OR 97209-4037 (503) 731-8200 FAX (503) 731-8259 Over the past year, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has been working with local and regional governments, interest groups, statewide agency and stakeholder committees, and the general public to develop a long-term program for the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US Highway 26) Corridor. The first phase of that process has resulted in this Interim Corridor Strategy.
The Interim Corridor Strategy is a critical element of the Portland-Cannon-Beach Junction Corridor Plan. , Corridor planning is a new approach to transportation planning statewide. ODOT and the communities bordering major transportation corridors to work together to build a plan that not only addresses the specific needs of each corridor, but also identifies each corridor's current and future uses and unique character.
With the completion of the 1992 Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP), ODOT has defined policies and broad improvement strategies for the statewide transportation network. The OTP is not intended to identify specific actions that should be taken on any particular transportation corridor, however. Rather, implementation and refinement of the OTP are to occur through the development of Modal and Corridor Plans. Modal Plans such as the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP)and other plans relating to bicycles, pedestrians and rail look at statewide
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Conidor Strategy 1 August 1997 needs 2nd policies for all of the different transportation rncdes. Corridor Plans provide 3 framework for long- term pjanning and development of all modes within specific transportation corridors. The OTP defines transportation corridors as major or high volume routes for moving people, goods and services from one point to another.
Over the next several years, ODOT will complete corridor plans for 30 transportation corridors identified in the OTP, urban area arterials, and interchange areas where development pressures have threatened operation. In ODOT Region 1, there are five priority corridors, including the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor.
A. CORRIDOR PLANNING
Process The corridor planning process recognizes that different segments of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor requires differing levels of study to develop a corridor-wide long-range plan. Thus, corridor planning moves from the general to the specific in a three-phased process (illustrated below). It is important to note that this planning may not occur in a linear fashion, i.e., that activities described in Phase 1 may occur after some Phase 2 or Phase 3 planning activities.
Phase 1
Transportation facilities and systems in each corridor are identified and analyzed for present and future performance in areas of modal balance, intermodal and regional connectivity, congestion and safety. In addition, characteristics of the corridor and the role it plays in the region are described in terms of land use, social, environmental, and economic development impacts.
Through this anakysis and public outreach, key issues and objectives regarding the present and future performance and impact of the corridor are identified. These findings and conclusions are the basis for a Corridor Strategy. This Strategy, comprised of a variety of performance and maiiagement objectives, helps ODOT and jurisdictions within the corridor plan for their transportation systems in a manner consistent with the OTP and other plans and policies.
Phase 1 corridor planning concludes with the endorsement of an Interim Corridor Strategy by cities, counties and metropolitan planning organizations within the corridor, and by the OTC.
Phase 2
Most of the corridor planning effort occurs in Phase 2 and focuses on developing corridor improvement and management elements and city and county transportation plans.
During Phase 2, a Corridor Improvement and Management Element are developed to test Interim Corridor Strategy objectives, analyze alternatives, provide general cost estimates and establish implementation priorities. Implementation decisions for each corridor objective may entail transportation improvements, operations and maintenance programs, agency liaison agreements, and management system category assignments. These decisions may be regulatory (e.g., level of importance, access management category assignments, etc.) or advisory (e.g., proposed capital projects, maintenance programs, etc.) in nature.
2 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 In conformance with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), Transportation Systems Plans (TSPs) are current'ly being or will be developed for cities, counties and metropolitan planning organizations within the corridor. ODOT is contributing staff and financial resources to these local efforts. Portions of TSPs that impact the corridor will be incorporated into the Corridor Improvement and Management Element to implement the objectives established in the Corridor Strategy. This process helps link corridor objectives to city and county comprehensive plans.
' Figure 2: Com'dor Planning Process m I Interim I Phase I
Phase 2 General City, County, and Regional Planning Transportation Process Systems Planning (TSP)*Process
...... Corridor Plan
Phase 3 - ...... Planning for Some Sites
Projects & Programs I
Counties with populations under 25,000 and cities under 2,500 may apply to the Land Conservation and Development Commission for a full or partial exemption from the requirements to develop a TSP. In order to meet remaining TPR requirements for these jurisdictions and complete corridor plans, ODOT is assisting exempt local jurisdictions through a process called general planning. Similar to transportation systems findings resulting from general planning that impact statewide corridors are included in corridor improvement and management elements.
Ponland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 3 August 1997 ODOT uses :he general planning process to reach implementation decisions in several circurns~znces: 1) for any cqrridor where statewide emphasis regarding transportation facilities and systems is needed; 2) to adequately analyze those portions of corridors that lie within exempt jurisdictions; or 3) where non-exempt local jurisdictions want ODOT to take the lead for transportation planning in the corridor.
At the conclusion of Phase 2, implementation decisions reached through transportation systems planning or general planning is combined in the Corridor Improvement and Management Element. The Interim Corridor Strategy is then refined to reflect these implementation decisions. The Corridor Improvement and Management Element, together with the Corridor Strategy, are adopted by OTC as the Corridor Plan.
Phase 3
Some portions of the corridor may require refinement planning during Phase 3 to resolve particular land use, access management or other issues that require a more in-depth analysis than required to prepare the Corridor Improvement and Management Element. The Corridor Plan may then be amended to incorporate the products of these refinement plans. The CTAG will remain active for future revisions to the Corridor Plan as necessary.
Prioritized improvements to corridor facilities, systems and management, identified in the Corridor Plan, provide the basis for updating the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) which is the basis for distributing the State's limited transportation resources. Corridor planning is helping ODOT, with the cooperation of local governments and input from the citizens of Oregon, make difficult funding decisions necessary to build and maintain a statewide transportation system that meets the growing demand for transportation for the next 20 years.
Development of the Corridor Strategy This Interim Corridor Strategy has been developed with the active involvement of local and regional governments in the corridor, interest groups, statewide agency and stakeholder committees and the general public. Key steps in- its development include:
A survey of corridor residents and other interested party was conducted through a newsletter mailing in September, 1995. The primary purpose of the survey was to identie issues and needs to be addressed in the corridor planning process. An August, 1996 newsletter and questionnaire solicited public input on key objectives from the recommended Interim Corridor Strategy.
Open Houses
Open houses were conducted in the corridor in October, 1995, to provide information on the planning process and to solicit input on issues and needed improvements to the transportation system, and priorities for objectives. An additional round of open houses was held in September, 1996, to solicit public input on preliminary objectives and priorities to be addressed in the Interim Corridor Strategy.
Local Government/Stakeholder Briefings
Briefings were provided to local government officials, local community planning organizations, and other interest groups during the process by the ODOT Team or by jurisdictional staff who served on the CTAG.
4 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 Public Comment
~ublic~~ommentthrough newsletter survey responses, open houses, letters and phone calls has been received throughout the planning process and has been incorporated into issues and objectives.
Technical Committees
Two technical committees were created to identify preliminary issues, opportunities and constraints; develop draft corridor objectives for public review; and advise on the planning process. These include an Internal " Review Team (IRT), composed of ODOT regional and district planners and engineers, and the Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG), previously described. The CTAG is the primary author of recommended objectives.
Interim Corridor Strategy As the first step in the Corridor Planning process, this Recommended Interim Corridor Strategy has been developed by the Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG), composed of representatives of ODOT, other state agencies and nine regional and local governments from the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor. This Recommended Interim Comdor Strategy will be reviewed, revised as needed, and approved by the governing bodies of the local jurisdictions. Resolutions of endorsement will be requested from these local jurisdictions and from the Oregon Transportation Commission.
The purpose of the Corridor Strategy is to establish realistic performance objectives for transportation in the corridor and to make major transportation.tradeoficdecisions.Objectives have been developed for all modes of transportation in the corridor based upon issues identified by local and regional governments in the corridor, interest groups, and the general public.
This Strategy is considered interim because additional detailed analysis will be performed during the development of TSPs and a Corridor Improvement and Management Element that may require modifications to the Strategy. Through this local and regional transportation system planning and refinement planning for the corridor plan, peri~dicreview, and local plan amendments, ODOT and the local and regional governments in the comdor will cooperatively work together to ensure that city and county comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances achieve Corridor Strategy objectives. Participating jurisdictions will come to consensus on changes to the Corridor Strategy which result from TSP work. ODOT will adopt the final Corridor Plan as an element of the OTP.
This Interim Corridor Strategy identifies a variety of desired management objectives and improvements to transportation facilities and services within the corridor. Objectives address the corridor as a whole, as well as major segments of the corridbr, but do not address specific sites or transportation improvements. Work during the TSP development along the corridor will identify specific projects and activities to implement the Corridor Plan. The final Corridor Plan will aiso identify priorities and timing for the various actions and responsibie public agencies and other service providers.
These objectives are intended to be used as guidelines in identifying specific projects for inclusion in future updates of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and local capital improvement programs (CIPs). Inclusion of any improvements in the corridor plan does not represent a funding commitment by ODOT or any local government until programmed in the STIP andlor a local CIP.
The Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan builds on the strategies and policies found in the Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP), the Oregon Highway Plan (OW) and other modal plans.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 5 August 1997 B. CORRIDOR ROLL'FUNCTIONS
li. The Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor serves both urban and rural transportation needs. Though multi- modal, the corridor is dominated by auto use on US Highway 26, which is part of the National Highway System. US 26 is one of two major tourist routes to the north coast and also provides the primary access from the Portland area to the Tillamook area through its connection to OR Highway 6.
In the urban or eastern portion (within the regional urban growth boundary) of the corridor, use of all .. transportation modes is increasing and expected to continue to increase over the life (15-20 years) of the Corridor Plan. In this portion, the Corridor has the following primary functions:
Both an inter-city and intra-city commuter route; Major regional transit corridor, which will be focused on the Westside light rail system when completed; Access to major employment centers in Portland and Washington County, most notably a growing high-tech industry; Major freight movement within the urban growth boundary (UGB); and Connections to 1-5 (via 1-405 and Highway 217) and 1-84 (via 1-405).
Within its rural or western portion (outside the regional UGB), the Corridor is noted for the following:
Linkage to north Oregon coast Tourism and access to recreation opportunities; Rural scenic qualities, e.g. it is designated by Washington County as a Scenic Route; Natural resource amenities, particularly agricultural and forest lands and scenic rivers; o Connection to other highways that serve rural communities and outlying cities such as Banks, North Plains, and Vernonia; and Freight movement for agricultural specialty crops, aggregate and forest products.
c. ASSUMPTIONS This Corridor Stratlegy makes a number of assumptions regarding other planning efforts, capital improvements, and other aspects of the transportation system. These assumptions, which are not repeated as issues or objectives, include:
Other Planning Processes Issues related to US 101 have previously been addressed in the Coastal Highway Corridor Plan, and will be further refined in the Highway 10 1 Scenic Byway study. Conidor plans for other state highways intersecting with US 26, e.g. Highway 47, will be prepared at a hture time, although t'le hctioning of these intersections may be addressed in this ccrridor plan. Regional (as opposed to comdor-specific) transportation system issues and needs are being addressed in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). A "Neighboring Cities" study is examining the potential impacts of regional growth management strategies on North Plains, including the need for urban growth byundary amendments.
Land Uses and Growth Assumptions regarding the eastern portion of the Corridor are based upon Metro's Region 2040 Growth Concept and include: - Significant population and employment growth focused on "Regional Centers" at Beaverton and Hillsboro and at "Town Centers" at the intersections of Highway 217, Murray Boulevard and 185th Avenue with US 26.
6 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 Limited UGB expansion; A Green Corridor from the Metro UGB to North Plains; and Significant growth in local intra-city trips. The rural portions of the Corridor (west of North Plains) are assumed to continue in resource uses, e.g. agriculture and forestry, with growth generally confined to acknowledged exception areas and existing rural community centers.
Highway Use
, A11 uses of US 26 will increase during the 20-year planning period. Use of US 26 as a primary route to the Tillarnook area via OR 6 will continually grow. The availability of "Tillamook Bum" timber stands for harvesting will increase use of the US 26 comdor for logging operations and transport.
Capital Im~rovement. The following capital improvements to US 26 are assumed; based upon their inclusion for construction in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP): - Extension of a light rail system from Portland to Hillsboro. - New interchange at Sylvan; - Reconstruction of the existing Camelot interchange as an overpass with no US 26 access; - Passing lane at Lindsley Creek - West Humbug Creek 0. The Vista Ridge tunnels will not be further widened. 0 Projects previously identified by ODOT and local jurisdictions but not included in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) are not assumed. -Other Current funding constraints are not assumed. The purpose of the Comdor Plan is to establish objectives and priorities for long-term management of and improvements to transportation facilities within the comdor, irrespective of current funding limitations. The ability to implement these objectives and priorities will be dependent upon- future available funding.
B. KEYTHEMES A wide variety of objectives have been developed to address the various elements of the corridor's $.mspoI-eaiion system. The following are the key themes reflected in the Interim CoKidor Strategy objectives.
* Allocation of state resousces to hi&way projecb according to the following priorities: (1) Maintenance of the existing facility to ensure that it remains safe and functional, e.g. ftving potholes. (2) Preservation of the roadway by investing in roadbed and pavement reconstruction as needed to minimize maintenance costs; (3) Transportation system management to optimize existing highway capacity; (4) Safety and capacity improvements; and (5) Projects that support economic development, particularly recreation and tourism. Design of facilities for all modes to accommodate planned land uses per the Region 2040 Growth Concept. Limited expansion in highway capacity within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). No expansion in highway capacity outside the Metro UGB, except for cIimbing/passing lanes and turning lanes and to address safety-related needs. Targeting of realignment and other improvements outside the Metro UGB to sections with above-average accident rates.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 7 August 1997 Use of light rail and other transit to accornrnodste a portion of additional trips. Increased reliance on parallel routes for intra-city trips. ~efianceupon local access management and circulation plans to relieve localized congestion problems. Increased freight movement via rail (between the Metro area and the central coast) and air. Application of the most restrictive access management standards (regulating the number, spacing, type, opportunities for left turns and location of driveways, intersections and traffic signals) for both local arterials and US 26, consistent with existing or planned adjacent land uses. Transportation-efficient land use patterns that reduce vehicle miles traveled and promote a livelwork balance.
' 11. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OBJECTIVES
A. TRANSPORTATION BALANCE The Oregon Transportation Plan establishes state policy to provide a balanced transportation system. A balanced transportation system is one that provides transportation options at appropriate minimum service standards, reduces reliance on the single occupant automobile where other modes or choices can be made available, particularly in urban areas, and take advantage of the inherent efficiencies of each mode. The transportation system should also maximize the efficiency of the existing system.
Air Service Within the corridor, the Port of Portland - Hillsboro Airport operates as a general commercial airport. Regularly scheduled commercial passenger air service is available from the Portland International Airport (PDX), north of the corridor, offers both domestic and international connections. It has access to freight and ports facilities,
The following airports also operate in the vicinity of the corridor: Astoria Regional Cornelius Skyport (general aviation) located north of Cornelius Eagle Airstrip (private) is located approximately one-quarter mile north of US 26 in North Plains Seaside Municipal Airport Tillamook Airport Vernonia Municipal Airport Stark's Twin Oak Airport (Hillsboro)
A.1 In lieu of developing new airports, protect existing general aviation airports. A.2 Implement land use regulations to protect against land use encroachments adjacent to general aviation airports. A.3 Consider a greater regional role for Hillsboro Airport providing freight service, particularly for high tech industries, and commuter/corporate air service that would be non-competitive with Portland International Airport. A.4 Improve connections via transit and other modes to Portland International Airport. A.5 Encourage public or private land andlor air shuttle service to coastal communities from Hillsboro Airport or Portland International Airport. A.6 Improve facilities at general aviation airports to provide additional air services.
Bicycles The 1995 Oregon Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan (which implements the OTP) establish the goal of providing safe, accessible and convenient bicycling facilities and to support and encourage increased levels of bicycling statewide. The Plan calls for a bikeway system that is integrated with other transportation systems; a safe, convenient and attractive bicycling environment; and improved bicycle safety. The Transportation Planning
8 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Comdor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 Rule (TPR) mandates the provision of safe, convenient and adequate facilities that meet the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. There are two general types of bicycle use in this corridor - commuting and recreational. ~icyclistscommonly use local parallel routes in the urban area, then connect with US 26 in the rural area for trips to the Oregon coast. In general, US 26 lacks a sufficiently wide shoulder for continuous bicycle use, and the two tunnels are bicycle-restrictive. There is potential for conflict with truck traffic in many areas.
Incorporate balanced opportunities for pedestrians and bicyclists in new or reconstructed transportation facilities. Maintain US 26 as a bicycle route, with use of local parallel routes as alternative routes where feasible. Designate and prioritize bikeway projects on major roadways parallel to US 26 within the Metro UGB. Addlimprove bicycle lanes or widen shoulders as part of highway improvement projects or as separate projects. Where feasible, provide standard continuous five-foot (at a minimum) shoulders. Emphasize shoulder maintenance (surfacing, cleaning, vegetation removal), particularly in the peak summer cycling months. Provide connections to local bicycle and hiking trail systems where feasible. Integrate bicycle connections in improvements to north/south routes. Provide for bicycle safety and accessibility on the Westside LRT. Link bicycle routes with van service, e.g. "flag stops," along the corridor. Accommodate bicycles on rural transit lines (if developed) and on rail. Investigate alternative solutions to facilitate safe bicycle passage through Sunset Tunnel. Allow auto parking area for bicyclists at the US 26/Highway 47 intersection for bicycle access to the Banks-Vernonia Linear Park. Develop abandoned railroad corridors into bikelpedestrian corridors.
Pedestrians Minimizing barriers to safe and convenient pedestrian travel is a goal of the OTP, while the TPR requires providing pedestrian facilities that allow direct, hazard-free travel (such as sidewalks in urban areas). Pedestrian facilities are not provided along US 26, although there are pedestrian facilities in close proximity to the corridor. In the urban area, the highway functions as a freeway and is not appropriate for pedestrian use. Most of the local pedestrian activity in the corridor occurs unevenly in rural settlement and commercial areas. There are pedestrian facilities for crossing US 26 at many interchanges along the corridor.
A.20 Within the corridor's urban section, at a minimum, provide six-foot sidewalks to increase mobility and safety of pedestrian activities at interchanges and other overcrossings. A.21 Integrate pedestrian connections in improvements to noMsouth routes. A.22 Develop trail connections/loops among corridor c- - munities. A.23 Promote railbanking for trails, e.g. extension of. %s-VernoniaTrail. A.24 Where feasible, provide sepmation between peaestrians and autos through access management and landscaping. A.25 Provide adequate pedestrian warning signs in rural service centers.
Public Transit The OTP calls for continuation and expansion of commuter transit service within the Portland metro area, which applies directly to the Cannon Beach - Portland corridor.
There is no intercity transit service serving the length of the corridor. The Sunset Empire Transportation District provides transit service for Clatsop County at the western end of the corridor, with regular fixed-route service between Astoria and Cannon Beach. The District also provides dial-a-ride services. North Coast Transit provides
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 9 August 1997 daily service between Cannon Beach and Astoria Monday through Friday. Within the Portland inetropolitan area, TRI-MET provides intercity bus and light rail transit.
Promote increased transit service throughout the corridor. Promote the use of Westside light rail and other transit to accommodate additional trips. Provide transit and high occupancy vehicles (HOV) bypass lane on US 26 entrance ramps within the Metro UGB. Establish transit service links to Westside LRT stations, employment centers, housing and airport facilities (Portland and Hillsboro) in the comdor. Provide transit support services (e.g. park and rides, park and pool) at Jackson School Road, Manning, Highway 47 Junction, and other appropriate locations. Provide enhanced security and comfort, i.e., covered waiting areas, at transit stations and park and ride locations. Expand the "Bikes on Buses" program within the corridor. Promote carpooling/vanpooling to transit centers and large employment centers. Investigate opportunities to expand transit service in the rural portion of the comdor. Encourage enhanced transit service from the Portland area to coastal communities, e.g. mini-buslvan service from Portland to the coast. Provide demand-responsive services in suburban areas and real time traveler information services in areas of high concentrations of employment, relying uppn Tri-Met's current GPS (Global Positioning System) system. Develop and implement a plan to coordinate and expand services for the transportation disadvantaged in the corridor. Improve pedestrian access to transit stops with sidewalks, street crossings and safer intersection design.
Rail Service Though many short rail lines travel in the Cannon Beach Junction - Portland corridor, the line connecting it to the coast is the most significant. The Port of Tillamook Bay (POTB) Railroad line provides rail freight service in the corridor, primarily carrying lumber products and cattle feed for dairies in Tillamook County. This line connects the Port of Tillamook to Portland & Western and Burlington Northern branch lines in Hillsboro, and has recently been rehabilitated and continues to undergo improvements. The OTP identifies minimum levels of service for rail freight service, and states that branch rail lines such as the POTB line should be maintained to allow a minimum speed of operation of 25 miles per hour whenever upgrading can be achieved with a favorable benefit-cost ratio. The OTP also states that reload facilities should be encouraged, and if warranted, supported.
There is no regular passenger rail service within the US 26 corridor. Seasonal excursion train service travels from Wheeler to Tillamook.
F.39 Encourage and facilitate use of the Port of Ti!lamook Bay (PQ'FS) md PortlmdWestern (P/W) rail lines for lumber, aggregate and other bulk product transport. A.40 Develop a consortium of railroad shippers to target industrial recruitment for rail services. A.41 Investigate the expansion of reload services to other commodity shippers. A.42 In conjunction with Intermodal Management System (IMS) planning, identify opportunities for interconnection of rail with other modes. A.43 Promote the expansion of excursion.tourisrdcommuter use of the railroad. A.44 Remove abandoned railroad trestle over US 26 at Cornelius Pass. A.45 Continue programs to upgrade railroad crossings in conjunction with other roadway improvements, with a priority to address safety improvements. A.46 Implement land use regulations that promote the use of existing rail lines for industrial uses and for future excursion and commuter uses.
10 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Conidor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 Truck Freight Truck Columes in the corridor vary, as does the type of freight being transport. Fewer than 500 trucks per day travel the extent of the corridor, and the most intense activity is in the urban end. Products carried by trucks along the corridor include raw and processed wood, agricultural products, and high tech equipment and goods. The OTP calls for a balanced freight transportation system and a "direct, convenient and physically suitable system for goods movement to transportation facilities and commercial and industrial areas to ensure a timely delivery of goods."
A.47 Construct additional truck climbing/passing lanes in the corridor's western portion, including an eastbound climbing lane at Jewel1 Junction to Osweg Creek in Clatsop County. A.48 Improve truck access to industrial sites, including turn and acceleration/deceleration lanes where appropriate. A.49 Identify improvements to Glencoe Road Interchange in North Plains to accommodate Glencoe Road as a major route for agricultural products. A.50 In coordination with the Oregon Department of Forestry and large private timberland owners in the corridor, provide safe truck access to US 26 from forest operations. A.51 Identify needed improvements to Cornelius Pass Road from US 26 to US 30, including those needed to better accommodate hazardous materials transport.
Water Transpoflorts There are no ports within the corridor. The closest large, deep draft ports are the Ports of Portland, Astoria and St. Helens. There are four ports in Tillamook County--the Port of Nehalem, Port of Bay City, Port of Tillamook Bay, and the Port of Garibaldi.
A.52 Maintain travel times for the movement of freight through the corridor to port facilities. A.53 Improve access and intermodal connections to port facilities. A.54 Investigate opportunities to establish an intermodal transportation facility at the Port of Tillamook Bay. Pipelines - Pipelines within the comdor are operated by and for the exclusive use of Northwest Natural Gas Company to deliver natural gas to their customers in northwest Oregon. There are no commercially available pipelines for shipping products within or to areas outside of the corridor. At this time, there have been no products or manufacturers identified who would utilize a pipeline transportation system. The OTP identifies the need by 2012 for a new natural gas pipeline that would cross the corridor in Clatsop County. This expansion is identified as necessary to make alternative fuels widely available to transportation users.
A.55 To the extent feasible, utilize pipeline rights-of-way as bicycle and pedestrian pathways and wildlife coii-idors. A.56 Accommodate pipelines in highway rights-of-way where feasible.
Telecommunications Improvements in telecommunications technology will impact transportation by decreasing commuting distances as employees work at home or in decentralized offices. Telecommunication opportunities exist within the corridor since many residents of the corridor own personal computers. A portion of the corridor passes through the high tech industrial area between the Metro UGB and Highway 217; this type of industry may provide telecommuting opportunities. The OTP projects a sevenfold increase in the use of telecommunication over 1990 levels by 20 12.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 11 August 1997 A.57 Promote the use of telecommunication technologies and programs, rspeciallq by high-tech compsnies and ,other large employers, as a means to reduce vehicle miles traveled. A.58 In lieu of constructing new facilities, consolidate new telecommunication facilities at existing microwave/cell site facilities. A.59 Investigate the use of US 26 as right-of-way for fiber optic and other telecommunication equipment. A.60 Coordinate the installation of fiber optics with highway improvements. A.61 Site communication facilities to eliminate "dead spots" in the corridor.
, Automobile The automobile is the primary mode of travel within the corridor. Automobile traffic volumes for the entire corridor have increased steadily, highest in the urban areas. The corridor handles a high number of recreational trips; US 26 provides a direct link from the Portland metropolitan area to the Oregon coast. A June, 1995, ODOT statewide motorist survey indicated that the highway is perceived as a route for recreation or pleasure trips.
The Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) seeks a transportation balance among modes of travel that access to the entire state. Thus, the OTP discourages highway capacity improvements that primarily serve commuters from outside urban growth boundaries. The Oregon Transportation Rule (TPR) establishes a goal to reduce per capita automobile travel in the Metro portion of the corridor.
A.62 Reduce the percentage of single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips through transportation demand management (TDM), e.g. transit and carpooling, and transportation system management (TSM) programs. A.63 Design any highway improvements within the Metro UGB to accommodate planned land uses per the Region 2040 Growth Concept. A.64 Respond to increased traffic associated with major employment growth in the Hillsboro and Beaverton areas through light rail and other transit planning and through identification of needed street improvements. A.65 Promote the use of parallel routes, e.g. Evergreen Boulevard, Bronson Road, Cornell Road and West Union Road, to decrease reliance on state highways for intra-city trips. A.66 Encourage the concentration of services within rural community centers to reduce the need for auto trips.
B. HIGHWAY CONGESTION
The Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) calls for providing LOS B or better in rural areas, LOS D or better in the Portland area, and LOS C or better in other urban areas. LOS is a qualitative measure of highway operations, graded on a scale from A to F (see Appendix). LOS A represents free flow traffic movements with no delays, while LOS F represents congested, stop-and-go conditions with significant delays. ODOT statistics indicate that 17 percent of the US 26 corridor is currently highly congested and 30 percent moderately congested. Without improvements, the forecast for 2016 is that 49 percent of the corridor will be highly congested, and 3 1 percent will be moderately congested. Improving levels of service and reducing congestion is addressed through facility management and urban and rural congestion strategies.
Facility Management As a statewide highway, the OHP management objective for US 26 is "to provide for safe and efficient high- speed continuous flow operation in rural areas and moderate to high-speed operations of flow in urban and urbanizing areas."
Access to US 26 is controlled in the urban area, with access allowed only at interchanges. Access is also controlled west of the Metro UGB to Tillamook Junction (Highway 47), with access either from local streets or
12 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 onto a frontage road. West of the junction, in and around the small communities along the I~i;h\?~?. :here is direct pccess onto the highway. At the western end of the corridor, between Cannon Beach Junction and Necanicum Junction, the area is dotted with rural residential development most of which has direct access onto the highway.
Encourage transportation demand management (TDM) and transportation system management (TSM) programs in the corridor. Utilize operating level of service (LOS) standards established in the Oregon Highway Plan (Om) as goals, recognizing that they may not be achievable in all segments. Develop local access management and circulation plans to relieve localized congestion problems. Develop consistent street classification, access management and speed standards for all corridor communities. For that segment of the corridor outside the Metro UGB, adopt the highest applicable access management category for each highway segment, consistent with existing or planned adjacent land uses at the rural community centers. Encourage state and private timber landowners to utilize existing access points to US 26 for management, fire protection, harvesting and recreation purposes. Develop interchange management plans as part of local TSPs. Allocate state resources to highway projects according to the following priorities: 1. Maintenance of the existing facility to ensure that it remains safe and functional, e.g. fixing potholes. 2. Preservation of the roadway by investing in roadbed and pavement reconstruction as needed to minimize maintenance costs; 3. Safety improvements; 4. Transportation system management to optimize existing highway capacity; and 5. Capacity improvements. Assess the feasibility of improvements to the I-4051US 26 Junction to meet National Highway System standards, based upon reconnaissance study findings. Establish policies for upgrading or limiting at-grade intersections with US 26 to respond to future traffic growth and safety needs. Identify ofiportunities for separated grade crossings of US 26 to reduce the reliance on interchanges for north-south crossings.
Congestion in Urbanized Areas Congestion is a measure of the level of service (LOS) provided by a section of highway facility (refer to the Appendix for an explanation of LOS and congestion). In the urban area congestion is often highly concentrated during the moming and evening ""rush" hours. The OTP policy is to ""define minimum levels of service and assure balanced, multimodal accessibility to existing and new development within urban areas."
B.12 Increase the capacity of the urban portion of US 26 through programmed highway widening improvements, i.e., State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). a. Construct the proposed addition of a third east bound lane with noise walls on US 26 between Highway 21 7 and Camelot Interchange and remove WiIshire on-ramps and close local accesses. b. Construct the proposed widening of US 26 to six lanes from Highway 217 to Murray Boulevard with a braided ramp west bound fiorn Highway 2 17. c. Construct the proposed highway project from the Camelot Interchange to the Sylvan Interchange (Phase 3) that includes reconstruction of the highway main line, replacing the Canyon Road crossing and adding a third lane. B.13 Accommodate additional capacity needed within the corridor's urban portion to meet regional and local demand through a balance of improvements to US 26 and local streets.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 13 August 1997 a. Investigate de..eiispment of dedicated HOV ianes on US 26 within the corridor's urban porrion to accommodate a portion of increased auto and transit trips. b. Investigate widening of US 26 to six lanes from Munay Boulevard to the Metro UGB (Shute Road). c. Investigate construction of eastbound on-ramp to US 26 at Cornelius Pass Road, eliminating left turn across Cornelius Pass Road. B.14 Use parallel routes, e.g., Evergreen Boulevard, Cornell Road and West Union Road to decrease reliance on US 26 for local trips based upon their limits of capacity, and functional, policy and operational roles. B.15 Investigate the feasibility of congestion pricing, mile-based andlor emission-based registration fees within the Metro UGB. B. 16 Implement congestion reduction strategies based upon the following priorities: (1) Demand reduction, such as TDM measures like carpooling, telecommuting; (2) System management, such as optimization programs or improvements to local street systems to reduce the demand for US 26 improvements; (3) Access management; and (4) Improvements and new facilities to accommodate additional capacity. B. 17 Investigate the appropriateness of lower levels of service in special transportation districts such as Transit Oriented Developments/Town Centers. B.18 Promote increased use of incident management and motorist information systems to minimize congestion during peak hours. B.19 Encourage use of light rail and other transit to accommodate a portion of the growth in trips.
Congestion in Rural Areas Congestion in the western end of the corridor is largely tourist-related with seasonal peaks. The new interchange at the Cannon Beach Junction has alleviated some of the congestion. There are also areas of light or moderate congestion at commercial areas along the highway, and in small communities with multiple highway accesses. Such congestion affects recreation traffic as well as the movement of goods and services. OTP policies stress the importance of minimum levels of service and the ability to move goods and services and to improve access in rural areas.
B.20 Provide ne improvements solely for highway capacity outside the Metro UGB. Provide climbing'passing lanes, turning lanes, and other improvements to address safety-related issues. B.21 Preserve rural sections of US 26 as rural through access management and land use controls. B.22 Construct the following improvements to provide for safe and efficient high-speed auto and truck operations in rural areas: a. Eastbound climbing lane at Jewell Junction to Qsweg Creek in Clatsop County; b. Median turn lane at Jewell Junction; c. Left turn lane at Manning in Washington County; and d. Interchange at Jackson School Road. 3.23 Investigate t!!e need for turning lanes and access rnanagement at: a. The Manning areaNehalem Highway (OR 47) junctions (north and south); b. Timber Road Junction; c. Camp 18 (longer turning lanes); d. Jewell Junction; e. Sitka Spruce viewing site; and f. Necanicum (OR 53) Junction. B.24 Investigate the following improvements to provide for safe and efficient auto and truck operations in rural areas: a. Interchange at Staleys Junction (US 26 and OR Highway 47); b. Ramps at Gordon Road, and c. Upgraded interchange at Glencoe Road.
14 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Conidor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 C. REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY Regional connectivity addresses how well-connected parts of the state are to one another as reflected by the transportation services available and travel times required to get from one place to another. Connectivity includes connections among modes and between places, and cooperative transportation roles among corridor communities. The OTP policy is to provide a transportation system with connectivity among modes within and between urban areas, with ease of transfer among modes and between local and state transportation systems.
Modal Connections ' Inter-modal connections are important for both passenger and freight transport. Within the Cannon Beach Junction - Portland corridor, passenger modal connections are concentrated in the urban end. There are intermodal links in the eastern portion of the corridor for both bus and automobile at transit centers and at park and ride lots, and for bikes and pedestrians to transit. There will be an intermodal connection at the Sunset Transit Center that includes light rail, bus, a park and ride lot with bicycle parking as well, and pedestrian facilities.
Alternately, there are currently no freight intermodal facilities in the corridor. The freight rail line, the POTB railroad, has little existing intermodal interaction, as it hauls specific material from point to point between Tillamook Bay and Hillsboro. Intermodal trucWfreight facilities need improvement at strategic locations, especially in Hillsboro.
There are currently no airports with commercial activity in the corridor, though the Portland-Hillsboro Airport may have commercial activity in the future with a potential for intermodal connections. No direct public transit service exists to either the Astoria Airport or the Portland Airport from outside the Tri-Met Service area.
(Intermodal connections are addressed in numerous other sections, e.g. Public Transit, Bicycles.)
C.l Take advantage of multi-modal capabilitiedcapacities of the corridor to promote development that is not solely autoltruck dependent. C.2 Investigate opportunities to establish intermodal facilities at the Portland-Hillsboro Airport and the Port of Tillamook-Bay.
Connections Between Places: Appropriate Travel Times Average travel times from Cannon Beach Junction to Portland are currently 103 minutes for autos and 13 1 minutes for trucks, and are predicted to degrade to 118 minutes for autos and 143 minutes for trucks. These forecasts assume the continuation of current growth trends, and no major improvements or changes in maintenance and operation practice The travel times are slower in the urban end of the comidor, especially in the morning and evening peak travei hours.
The Oregon Highway Plan (1991) calls for operating speeds of 55 mph in rural areas and lower density urban Fringe areas, and 45 mph in higher density urban areas. Where rural geography prevents 55 mph operating speeds, the OHP establishes the highest design standards compatible with the environment but consistent with economic efficiency.
C.3 In lieu of major capacity expansions, strive to maintain existing travel times for both autos and freight through high levels of facility management (acceleration/deceleration lanes, turn refuges, Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), and access management). C.4 Construct additional passing and truck climbing lanes in the rural portion of the corridor. C.5 Investigate future travel demands and uses for Cornelius Pass Road as a connection between US 26 and US 30.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 15 August 1997 C.5 Minimize use of US 36 fcr local traffic through sn int::ccnnected nehvork of streets (arterials, collectors, local streets) in the urban portion of the corridor. C.7 Develop non-interchange crossings within the Metro UGB to reduce north-south travel at existing interchanges.
Interconnected, Cooperative Transportation Roles Among Corridor Communities The highway in this corridor plays many roles. US 26 is a main link between the inland Willarnette Valley and the Oregon Coast, but for some of the smaller communities along the corridor, such as Manning and Elsie, the highway is the main street. In the western end of the corridor, US 26 connects downtown Portland and the rest of the region, including Beaverton, Hillsboro, and Washington County. It also connects communities to the south, such as Tigard and Lake Oswego, via Highway 217 to US 26.
Each community along the comdor is unique, with issues and concerns that reflect the needs of local citizens and businesses. US 26 acts as a common lifeline, and actions taken by one community may affect others. In addition, decisions made about the future role of US 26 may affect other transportation facilities.
C.8 Investigate opportunities for improvements to the US 26A405, and US 26JOR 217 interchanges. C.9 Improve, expand and coordinate signage to inform travelers of route choices available. C.10 Integrate arterial, freeway, transit and freight management systems through use of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies. C.ll Utilize access management on urban arterials to maintain mobility between major activity centers within the comdor and to enhance pedestrian connections. C.12 Improve highway-to-highway connections between US 26 and Highways 47,53, and 202. C.13 Investigate seismic retrofitting of US 26, e.g, Quartz Creek Bridge, needed to maintain access to corridor communities.
D. ROADWAY CONDITIONS
Adequate roadway-conditions are necessary to meet OTP goals regarding accessibility, levels of service and reduced congestion. The OHP identifies minimum tolerable conditions (MTCs) for lane width and right shoulder width for a statewide highway. This includes upgrading the highway to meet geometric and pavement MTCs over time.
Roadway Geometry Roadway geometry addresses the physical configuration of the highway. It includes lane widths, curvature and the alignment of the roadway. The MTC targets for US 26 are for a minimum lane width of 11 feet in urban sections and 12 feet in rural sections. Right shoulder width targets are a six-foot minimum in urban and rural sections with average annuai daily traffic (AADT) greater thm 2,000 md a four-foot minimum in mral sections with AADT less than 2,000. Approximately 25 percent of US 26 currently does not meet MTCs roadway geometry standards. In addition, there are a few segments of highway with substandard vertical and horizontal curves, resulting in delays and reduced safety.
D.l Target improvements to sections with above average accident rates, slide prone areas and sections with high congestion rates where there is a favorable costbenefit ratio. D.2 Improve sight distances and approach road angles, e.g. entering US 26 from Highway 53, ShuteHelvetia . and Glencoe Interchanges, and long curve up to US 26NS 10 1 junction. D.3 Identify and mitigatelimprove roadside obstacles and sign hazards.
16 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 Surface Condition Surface conditions address the condition of the highway pavement, including pavement and maintenance. The OHP calls for improving and maintaining pavement surface to fair or better condition. While the majority of US 26 has pavement surface in fair or better condition, there are segments, especially in the rural areas, that do not meet that standard.
The OTC establishes a goal of 90 percent fairbetter by 2010 for road surface conditions statewide. This goal is intended to do more than provide a quality ride for the motoring public; it is also a better way of doing business, Pavement studies show that, on average, for every dollar spent treating "fair or better" pavement, ODOT would need to spend four dollars to repair that same pavement if it fell into the poor category.
D.4 Maintain roadway surface conditions at 90 percent fair or better by the year 20 10. D.5 Maintain a program of low cost, high yield maintenance. D.6 Identifjdaddress drainage problems where they affect the function and condition of the roadway. D.7 Where feasible, use pavement overlay materials that reduce wet pavement spray. D.8 Investigate solutions to highway pavement stress caused by weather conditions in higher elevations. D.9 Develop shared maintenance agreements with local governments.
E. SAFETY Safety is a high priority in the OTP, and the improvement of transportation safety is a constant goal of all agencies involved in the provision of transportation services, whether the mode is by automobile, rail, air, transit, pedestrian or bicycle. ODOT seeks improvements through vehicle design, operating systems, operating environment, training, enforcement, and education.
High Accident Locations ODOT collects and analyzes accident data through its Safety Priority Index System (SPIS), which compares accident sites statewide by frequency and severity. Intersections or segments of roadway with an SPIS in the top ten percent statewide are identified as problem locations, warranting further study. Analysis of SPIS data for US 26 finds mltiple locations which are classified as high accident sites. In 1992, US 26 the number of high accident locations per mile was much higher than the statewide average, while the overall accident rate was lower than the state average; Segments in the western end experience higher accident rates.
Target resources to reduce accident potential in high accident locations within the conridor, using the Safety Management System to identify unsafe intersections and highway segments. Develop a consistent safety project ranking system among corridor jurisdictions. Encourage changes in driver behavior through Corridor Safety Program measures as a preference to physical improvements. Improve lighting at key locations aloag the corridor and maintain delineation (e.g. fog lines, reflector buttons) for high visibility. Install guard rails where needed to meet highway safety standards. Investigate the need for safety improvements at at-grade intersections. Install rural railroad track crossing protection where needed to meet safety standards. Provide adequate turn lanes on US 26 near congested railroad crossings to prevent highway backups. Consider realignment or other improvements of intersections with limited sight distances. Install weather condition monitoring devices at strategic locations in the comdor. Provide emergency assistance callboxes/telephones and additional safety rest stops. Provide signage to advise of winter driving conditions, icy areas, e.g., Quartz Creek Bridge. Provide additional truck climbing lanes and slow-moving vehicle turnouts at key locations, and extend the length of existing inadequate climbing lanes and slow-moving vehicle turnouts where feasible.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 17 August 1997 E.ld Enccurage use of radar reader bcards to control speed in prcblem areas. Provide adequate signage and enforcement in sunken gradelslide areas where travel speeds need to be decreased. E. 15 Staff and maintain interjurisdictional incident response teams within the corridor's urban portion.
Hazardous Material Transport The OTP addresses the transport of hazardous materials by requiring the safe transport of such materials. Safe transport of hazardous materials is one function of the US 26 corridor. The transport of hazardous materials is one function of the US 26 corridor, although it is not allowed through the Vista Ridge Tunnel at the eastern end of the corridor or through the Sunset Tunnel in the western half of the corridor. To avoid these tunnels, hazardous materials are transported via Cornelius Pass Road and US 30.
E. 16 Review state and local hazardous materials response programs to identify potentially unsafe locations. E.17 Identify and prioritize safety and maintenance improvements to Highway 217, Cornelius Pass Road, and US 30 to accommodate their use as hazardous waste transport routes.
Need for Additional Traffic Enforcement Traffic enforcement includes traffic safety officers and electronic traffic measures, such as automated signage, advisory radio service, and electronic monitoring. In the eastern end of the corridor, electronic signage during construction, and ramp metering are two methods of traffic control that are in use. Automated signage might be effective in the rural portions of the corridor to inform motorists of delays from congestion or accidend, inclimate weather, forest fires, or rock falls.
E.18 Focus additional law enforcement to entrancedexits of rural community centers, areas of high accident rates, and where rural travel speeds must be reduced (e.g., sunken gradelslide areas). E.19 Provide additional law enforcement presence, particularly on weekends, to increase enforcement of motor vehicle codes, including slow moving vehicle regulations, truck speed limits, and lane use regulations.
F. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY IMPACTS Transportation improvements in the corridor must be balanced among modes, as noted above, and must also consider potential environmental, energy, social, and economic impacts. According to the OTP, the design, construction and operation of the transportation system should "positively affect both the natural and built environment... where adverse affects can not be avoided, minimize or mitigate their affect on the environment."
Scenic Resources Many areas of the Cannon Beach Junction - Portland corridor are scenic, and are appreciated as such in local and regional plans. The Washington County Comprehensive Plan designates US 26 as a Scenic Route from the UGB to the County line. This means that the highway is an "excellent scenic road which offers a vista of the Tualatin Valley and the Cascade Mountains." The highway beyond the county line to Cannon Beach Junction cgntinues through a forested corridor for most of the route. In the Region 2040 Plan, the section from the Portland UGB to North Plains is a "Green Corridor" connecting the Metro UGB to North Plain's UGB.
F.l Investigate the desirability of seeking federal designation of the rural portion of the corridor as a Scenic Byway. F.2 Investigate the need for additional roadside turnouts at scenic viewpoints and seek to maximize access safety at scenic viewpoints. ~.3' Discourage siting of additional, and replacement of existing, billboards. Investigate alternatives, e.g. Oregon Tourism Alliance travel information program.
18 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 F.4 Pzrsue provisions to protect and create scenic vistas, such as vegetation management measures to replace or mitigate vegetation lost to timber harvest or to transportation system projects. F.5 Create vegetation buffers to reduce the potential for slides and erosion. F.6 Improve directional signing for existing attractions. F.7 Improve screening of ODOT maintenanceJstorage areas.
Natural Resources Oregon's Statewide Planning Goal Five (see Appendix), implemented through local comprehensive plans, is to conserve open space and preserve natural and scenic resources. Other state and federal requirements also protect wetlands and threatened and endangered species.
Natural resource areas and wildlife habitat areas exist throughout the corridor. Wetlands and wildlife habitat are associated with several creeks along the corridor. The Necanicum River runs along the highway beginning near the OR 53 Junction, and provides habitat for various types of fish and other wildlife and anadromous fish. In the urban area, the Sunset Canyon is an important wildlife habitat, composed of a coniferous and mixed forest. There are no known threatened and endangered plant or wildlife species in the corridor.
F.8 To the extent possible, avoid or minimize impacts to Goal 5 resources during construction and maintenance activities. F.9 Mitigate unavoidable Goal 5 impacts of transportation system improvements during construction. F.10 Minimize impacts from the transportation system, particularly local roads connecting to US 26, on wildlife migration routes. F.ll Develop strategies to facilitate the safe movement of wildlife across highways and the maintenance of their forage base and habitats. F.12 Include mitigation of prior adverse impacts to habitat in the design of new improvement projects. F. 13 Provide adequate signage of designated big game viewing areas.
Air Quality The urban areas of the Cannon Beach - Portland corridor are subject to a number of air quality standards. The Oregon Benchmarks, adopted by the state legislature in 1994, call for all areas of the state to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards by 2010. The TPR also mandates a reduction in vehicle miles traveled per capita in the Portland metropolitan area, an EPA-designated non-attainment area for air quality. In addition, the federal Clem Air Act requires states with areas exceeding the standards for air pollutants to develop pollutant- reduction plans to meet the standards. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is developing maintenance plans for the Portland nonattainment areas. Transportation activities that are regionally significant or subject to approval or by a federal agency must conform to the plan and cannot cause or contribute t-k> a new violation of any standard, increae the frequency or severity of any existing violation, or delay timely attainment of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or milestones in any area.
F. 14 Institute measures to reduce vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) per capita and congestion, particularly within the Portland airshed, to achieve Oregon Benchmarks and state and federal air quality standards. F. 15 Use construction techniques that minimize negative air quality impacts. F.16 Implement automated traffic management system techniques (ATMS) to minimize congestion and air pollutant emissions.
Water QualityIQuantity Transportation facilities affect water quality principally through the pollutant loading in surface runoff from paved surfaces. There is also the potential for contamination of ground water within the corridor from accidental spills of motor vehicle fuels or hazardous or toxic cargoes. In addition, past projects have reduced
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 19 August 1997 the number and quali~.of wetlands, which play an important role in maintaining :he quality of surfzce wares. US 26 ,crosses several streams and runs parallel to the Nehalem and Necanicum Rivers. Roadway projects and maintenance activities can directly impact these waterways. The Necanicum River is a source of drinking water for the Cannon BeachISeaside area. "Soft" soils west of the Coast Range has necessitated that most creeks be culverted under the highway.
F.17 Design roadway improvements and other facilities to minimize and treat surface run-off. F. 18 To the extent possible, avoid or minimize transportation system improvement impacts to Goal 5 resources during construction and maintenance activities and mitigate unavoidable impacts. F.19 Design new improvements and retrofit existing transportation improvements to encourage the conservation, restoration, and protection of coastal salmon habitat.
Energy Conservation The OTP mandates minimizing transportation-related energy consumption through improved vehicle efficiencies, use of clean burning motor fuels, and increased use of fuel efficient modes which may include railroads, transit, carpools, vanpools, bicycles and walking. In the rural portion of the corridor, there are currently few alternative modes to the auto available. In the urban portion of the corridor, on the other hand, a wide variety of modes are available for use, providing the opportunity for selecting an energy efficient mode of travel.
(Note: Energy consumption would be reduced by many of the proposed objectives in this document, particularly those related to promoting increased use of transportation demand management and alternative transportation modes.)
F.20 Promote energy conservation through the use of fuel-efficient modes of travel, improving vehicle efficiencies, and providing alternative fueling sites. F.2 1 Encourage energy conservation through design, construction, and operation of transportation facilities. G. SOCIAL- AND LAND USE ]IMPACTS Transportation projects impact the built environment and the population of communities within a corridor. Corridor planning must strive to balance the expansion of transportation facilities with the protection of social, cultural and environmental resources. The QTP goal is to "develop a multimodal transportation system that provides access to the entire state, supports acknowledged comprehensive land use plans, is sensitive to regional differences, and supports livability in urban and rural areas."
Effects on Community Livability The communities in the corridor vary from residential neighborhoods in the urban are% to small unincorporated communities, such as Elsie and Manning, in the rural area. There are also pockets of rurai residential development throughout the rural portion of the corridor. In the central portion of the corridor, the highway passes through a number of Forest Waysides, and it also provides access to recreational and scenic areas.
G.l Design transportation system improvements to preserve the livability of the communities within the comdor and to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts to sensitive cultural resources and other community resources. G.2 Improve pedestrian crossing opportunities, particularly in rural community centers to reduce the "barrier" . effect of the roadway and to foster good pedestrian connections between both sides of the road. G.3 Consult with Native American Tribes, state agencies, and local governments concerning the presence of significant cultural resources and uses. G.4 Retain the spring-fed water fountains west of the Sunset Safety Rest Area.
20 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Comdor Strategy August 1997 G.5 Relocate the Joseph L. Meek historic marker off of US 76 to Jackson Sch~701Road. G.6 - Investigate traffic management measures such as reducing speed limits to promote the livability or rural communities through which US 26 passes.
Land Use Impacts Land use patterns affect the demands placed on the highway. Land uses in the corridor include urban and rural uses. Outside the UGB, land uses are predominantly forest and agricultural. There are several small communities and scattered residential and commercial development either adjacent to US 26 or dependent upon the highway for access. Within the Metro UGB, existing land uses are a mix of residential and commercial nodes around interchanges and industrial park uses. Future land uses include nodes of mixed use development, called Town Centers, at the Highway 2 17, Murray, and 185th Interchanges on US 26.
Ensure that city and county comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances and local and regional transportation system plans achieve Corridor Strategy objectives. Encourage transportation-efficient land use patterns that reduce vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) per capita and promote a live-work balance. Take advantage of the multi-modal capabilities/capacities of the comdor to promote development that is not solely auto/truck oriented. Implement the Region 2040 Growth Concept to reduce reliance on SOV travel within the corridor. Accommodate continued growth by constructing alternative local transportation routes. Utilize access management to minimize any negative impacts of new development on US 26. Preserve the rural character of that portion of the corridor outside UGBs. Limit additional commercial and residential land use designations along the corridor outside UGBs to designated rural community centers. Implement land use regulations to protect against land use encroachments adjacent to general aviation airports. Design highway improvements to limit adverse land use impacts, consistent with the TPR and local land use regulations.
H. ECONOMIC IMPACTS Transportation systems can have a significant positive or negative economic impact. New transportation services;as well as transportation system improvements, can act as a catalyst for the siting of new businesses and the creations of jobs and for promoting access to tourism opportunities. The OTP goal is to "promote the expansion and diversity of the economy through the efficient and effective movement of goods, services, and passengers in a safe, energy eEcient, and environmentally sound manner.'"
Economic Development The economy of the corridor is, for the most part, the economy of the Portland Metropolitan Area. Outside of the UGB; the economy is based on agricultural and forest products, tourism, and recreational travel. me east end of the corridor includes the fastest growing economic submarket in the Portland region. The economy is diverse, and the high tech industry, which is focused along the US 26 corridor, plays a large part in the local economy.
H.1 Balance investments in the transportation system between regional transportation needs and the transportation needs of individual businesses to facilitate business expansion. H.2 Improve access to industrial and commercial users by improving the local street network. H.3 Encourage projects which are compatible with the development of ecotourism.
Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy 2 1 August 1997 Recreation Opportunities US 26"'is a prime route for access to the Oregon coast and campgrounds and rivers along the highway in the Coast Range. There are parks throughout the corridor, from Washington Park and Zoo at the eastern end to Saddle Mountain State Park and several county parks in the western end. Some of the parks have campgrounds and have hiking trails and picnic facilities. There are also numerous informal hiking trails scattered along the highway. Both the Necanicum and the Nehalem Rivers run along the highway and offer fishing and boating resources, as well as more informal recreational activities.
' H.4 Improve access to selected recreation areas based upon capacity and safety constraints. H.5 Promote the development of limited additional developed recreational opportunities in the rural sections of the corridor. H.6 Improve recreation/tourist-oriented directional signing. H.7 In cooperation with the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODOF), implement the ODOF Recreation Plan and Interpretive Master Plan within the corridor. H.8 Develop interpretive displays and trails at the Sunset Rest Area. H.9 Promote the continuation of existing recreational air activities at North Plains and Cornelius airports.
I. MISCELLANEOUS These objectives are either general in nature or do not fit easily into one of the other categories above.
1.1 Investigate alternative financing mechanisms for transportation improvements, including, but not limited to system development charges, congestion pricingltoll roads, and public-private partnerships. 1.2 Work with state agencies and local governments to provide rapid access to forest lands for fire protection. 1.3 Maintain a corridor-wide advisory group to assist ODOT in prioritizing transportation projects, reviewing transportation system plans for conformance with the Comdor Strategy, and assisting in preparing and updating the Corridor Plan, as needed.
22 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan - Interim Corridor Strategy August 1997 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US Highway 26) Corridor Plan
Chapter 1 Overview of Corridor Planning
Chapter 2 Existing and Future Conditions
Chapter 3 Corridor Issues, Opportunities, and Constraints
Chapter 4 Interim Corridor Strategy
Oregon Department of Transportation
Prepared by: ODOTRegions 1 62 Parsons Brinckerhofl Quade & Douglas, Inc. Paula Calvin Associates Cogan Owens Cogan
October 1997 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF CORRIDOR PLANNING
I. INTRODUCTION 11. CORRIDOR PLANNING DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE A. CORRIDOR PLANNING CONCEPT B. CORRIDOR PLANNING BENEFITS C. PLANNING REQUIREMENTS D. CORRIDOR PLANNING PROCESS E. CORRIDOR PLANNING PARTICIPANTS
CHAPTER 2: EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
I. GENERAL CORRIDOR OVERVIEW A. CORRIDOR LOCATION B. DESCRIPTION OF THE CORRIDOR C. PHYSICAL SETTING 11. EXISTING CORRIDOR CONDITIONS A. ECONOMY B. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT C. POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT ANALYSIS D. TRANSPORTATION 111. CORRIDOR SEGMENTS A. SEGMENT 1 - CANNON BEACH JUNCTION (US 101) TO NECANICUM JUNCTION B. SEGMENT 2 - NECANICUM JUNCTION (OR 53) TO EAST HUMBUG CREEK C. SEGMENT 3 - EAST HUMBUG CREEK TO JEWELL JUNCTION D. SEGMENT 4 - JEWELL JUNCTION TO STALEYS JUNCTION (OR 47) E. SEGMENT 5 - STALEYS JUNCTION (OR 47) TO TILLAMOOK JUNCTION (OR 6) F. SEGMENT 6 - TILLAMOOK JUNCTION (OR 6) TO THE WEST EDGE OF METRO UGB 6. SEGMENT 7 - WEST EDGE OF THIE METRO UGB TO 1-405 IV. FUTURE CONDITIONS A, LAND USE AND ECONOMY B. POPULATION AND EMPLOYIkZENT C. TRANSPORTATION V. CONCLUSIONS AND KEY FINDINGS A. TJ3E TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR B. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT C. LAND USE AND ECONOMY D. TRANSPORTATION Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Table of Contents
CHAPTER THREE - CORRIDOR ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, CONSTRAINTS
I. INTRODUCTION A. ORGANIZATION B. ASSUMPTIONS 11. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ISSUES, CONSTRAINTS, AND OPPORTUNITIES A. TRANSPORTATION BALANCE B. HIGHWAY CONGESTION C. REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY D. ROAD CONDITIONS E. HIGHWAY SAFETY F. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY IMPACTS G. COMMUNITY AND LAND USE IMPACTS H. ECONOMIC IMPACTS
CHAPTER FOUR - INTERIM CORRIDOR STRATEGY
I. INTRODUCTION A. INTERIM CORRIDOR STRATEGY B. CORRIDOR ROLERUNCTIONS C. ASSUMPTIONS D. KEY THEMES 11. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OBJECTIVES A. TRANSPORTATION BALANCE B. HIGHWAY CONGESTION C. REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY D. ROADWAY CONDITIONS E. SAFETY F. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY IMPACTS G. SOCIAL AND LAND USE IMPACTS H. ECONOMIC IMPACTS I. MISCELLANEOUS
APPENDICES
Issues Matrix Preliminary Objectives Comments and Responses CTAG Roster Public Involvement Technical HPMSAP, Level of Service (to be added at a later date) Relevant Plans and Polices Environmental Assessment Acronym Definitions (to be added at a later date) Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Figures and Tables
FIGURES AND TABLES
CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF CORRIDOR PLANNING
Figure I Corridor Planning Process and Phases
CHAPTER 2: EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
Figure I Location of US 26 in Oregon Figure 2 General Corridor Area Figure 3 Highway Network Figure 4 Existing Public Airports Figure 5 Existing Rail Lines Figure 6 Existing Water Ports Figure 7 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Segments Figure 8 Segment 1 Figure 9 Segment 2 Figure 10 Segment 3 Figure I I Segment 4 (part I) Figure 12 Segment 4 (part 2) Figure 13 Segment 5 Figure 14 Segment 6 Figure I5 Segment 7 Figure 16 Generalized Land Uses
CHAPTER 2: EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
Table I Historical Population Table 2 Historical Employment Table 3 Average Daily TrafJic Counts, 1986-1995 4.7 miles west ofBuxton at the Sunset Tunnel Table 5 1996 Proportion of Corridor Subject to Congestion Table 6 Inventory of Existing Public Airports Table 7 Population Forecasts Table 8 Employment Forecosts Table 9 Forecast - Average Annual Daily TrafJic Volume Table I0 Forecast - Travel Times of Cars and Trucks Table I I Congestion Forecast Table 12 Forecast Comparison of Corridor Accidents and Rates Chapter 1
OVERVIEW OF CORRIDOR PLANNING Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Overview of Corridor Planning
I. INTRODUCTION
ODOT is developing corridor plans for those corridors identified in the Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) as being of statewide importance. This document proposes a strategy and objectives for the operation, preservation and enhancement of transportation facilities within the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor (US 26) from the 1-405 junction to the US 101 junction. The corridor strategy covers a 20-year planning horizon, building upon federal, state, and local transportation and land use policies and plans, together with a comprehensive consultation with stakeholders in the corridor. This corridor strategy will guide development of the Corridor Plan and Refinement Plans for the specific areas and issues in the corridor.
The corridor plan calls for all of the jurisdictions along the corridor and the Oregon Transportation Commission to endorse the Interim Strategy. The Corridor Strategy will be included in all local transportation plans and comprehensive land use plans in the future. This will ensure that the corridor is preserved and enhanced to the benefit of all users along the corridor.
This chapter consists of a general overview of the corridor planning process. Chapter Two includes a description of existing and future conditions of the corridor at both the regional and corridor segment levels, key findings affecting long-term management of the corridor, and a summary of relevant planning along the corridor. Issues, opportunities and constraints identified during the planning process are provided in Chapter Three. Chapter Four is the Interim Corridor Strategy.
11. CORRIDOR PLANNING DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE
A. CORRIDOR PLANNING CONCEPT A corridor plan is a long-range (20-year) program for managing transportation systems that move people, goods and services within a specific transportation corridor. ODOT is currently developing corridor plans for the 31 corridors of statewide or interstate importance as identified in the Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP). Other transportation corridors will be studied as resources allow. Each corridor planning area includes statewide transportation facilities, systems, and land that influence transportation performance.
Transportation corridors are defined as broad geographic areas sewed by various transportati ystems that provide important connections between regions of the state for passengers, goods, and services. Transportation , facilities are defined as individual modal or multimodal conveyances and terminals; within a corridor, facilities may be of local, regional, or statewide importance. Examples of facilities are highways, rail transit lines, transit stations, and bicycle paths. Transportation systems are defined as networks of transportation links, services, and facilities that collectively are of statewide importance even though the individual components in the system may be of only local or regional significance. Examples include highway, rail, public transportation, and bicycle systems.
ODOT is developing statewide management systems and modal plans for automobile, truck, passenger and freight rail, aviation, bicycle and pedestrian modes, and intermodal facilities, in addition to a transportation safety action plan. While many modes of transportation and transportation facilities are not owned or operated by the state (e.g.. railroads, bus systems, port facilities), the state has a special interest in their performance given their interaction with ODOT facilities and collective significance to the statewide transportation system. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Overview of Corridor Platinrng
B. CORRIDOR PLANNING BENEFITS
Benefits of corridor planning for the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor include:
Resolution of Major Planning Issues Prior to the Initiation of Project Development Consensus among local, regional, and state governments regarding project purpose and needs is essential to successful project development. Corridor planning provides a framework within which individual projects located in corridor communities can be reviewed and prioritized.
Preservation of Transportation Rights-of-Way Costs for transportation rights-of-way increase substantially as land suitable for transportation is developed for other purposes. Uncertainty about right-of-way needs may also impact property owners, businesses, and at times entire communities. The scope and 20-year planning horizon of a corridor plan identifies long-range right-of-way needs which serve to direct future development, reducing development costs and environmental, social, and economic impacts.
Protection of Transportation Investments To prevent premature obsolescence of highways and other facilities, corridor planning examines alternate means to accommodate transportation needs with and without capital-intensive improvements. Alternatives such as access management, utilization of parallel local streets, reconfigured land use patterns and demand management programs (i.e., rideshare, public transportation, flex-time, etc.) are considered in lieu of or in addition to major capital improvements.
Partnerships With Diverse Public and Private Agencies and Organizations Corridor planning provides a forum for resolution of policy issues and negotiation of strategic partnerships between organizations striving to fulfill complementary missions with limited resources. Examples include local, state and federal agencies, Native American tribes, and transportation associations.
ING REQUIREMENTS
There are several federal and state mandates impacting how corridor planning is to be undertaken. The three most important of these are: the 199 1 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA); the Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP); and the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). While very different policy initiatives, all three share several common themes: 1) a requirement that transportation plans provide a balanced transportation system providing transportation options; 2) that transportation plans reduce reliance upon the single occupant vehicle and increase the opportunity for modal choice; and 3) that transportation plans be coordinated with land use plans, and address the environmental, social, economic, and energy consequences of proposed actions.
A summary of the OTP, the TPR, and ISTEA is provided in Appendix 6. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Overview of Corridor Planning
D. CORRIDOR PLANNING PROCESS
The corridor planning process recognizes that different segments of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor require differing levels of study to develop a corridor-wide long-range plan. Thus, corridor planning moves from the general to the specific in a three phased process (illustrated below). It is important to note that this planning may not occur in a linear fashion, i.e., that activities described in Phase 1 may occur after some Pliase 2 or Phase 3 planning activities. Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between these phases of the planning process.
Phase 1: Interim Corridor Strategy
With requirements to consider a range of transportation modes and impacts on land use and the environment, a corridor strategy is established in order to properly address the goals and policies of the OTP and statewide mode plans. A corridor strategy provides a set of transportation performance and impact objectives for each corridor.
Transportation facilities and systems in each corridor are identified and analyzed for present and future performance in areas of modal balance, intermodal and regional connectivity, congestion and safety. In addition, characteristics of the corridor and the role it plays in the region are described in terms of land use, social, environmental, and economic development impacts.
From these analyses come key findings and conclusions regarding the present and future performance and impact of the corridor. These findings and conclusions are the basis for a corridor strategy. This strategy, described in detail through a number of corridor objectives, helps ODOT and jurisdictions within the corridor plan for their transportation systems in a manner consistent with the OTP and other plans and policies.
Phase 1 corridor planning concludes with the endorsement of an Interim Corridor Strategy by cities, counties, and metropolitan planning organizations within the corridor, and by the OTC.
Phase 2- Corridor Management Plan
Most i . .::c corridor planning effort occurs in Phase 2 and focuses on developing corridor improvement and management elements, and city and county transportation plans,
During Phase 2, a Corridor Improvement and Management Element is developed to test Interim Corridor Strategy objectives, analyze alternatives, provide general cost estimates and establish implementation priorities. Implementation decisions for each corridor objective may entail transportation improvements, operations and maintenance programs, agency liaison agreements, and management system category assignments. These decisions may be regulatory (e.g., level of importance, access management category assignments, etc.) or advisory (e.g., proposed capital projects, maintenance programs, etc.) in nature.
In conformance with the TPR, Transportation Systems Plans (TSPs) are currently being or will be developed for cities, counties, and metropolitan planning organizations within the corridor. ODOT is contributing staff and financial resources to these local efforts. Portions of TSPs that impact statewide corridors will be Portland-Cannon Beach .lunction Corridor Overview of Corridor Plarln~ng
incorporated into the Corridor Improvement and Management Element to implement the objectives established in the Corridor Strategy. This process helps link corridor objectives to city and county comprehensive plans.
Figure I Corridor Planning Process and Phases
Phase . One Interim Corridor Strategy
City or County Transportation Systems Planning (TSP) Process
Produce Corridor Plan 4 ------I
Refinement Phase Three
Projects and Programs Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Overview of Corridor Planning
Counties with populations under 25,000 and cities under 2,500 may apply to the Land Conservation and Development Commission for a full or partial exemption from the requirements to develop a TSP. In order to meet remaining TPR requirements for these jurisdictions and complete corridor plans in these instances, ODOT is assisting exempt local jurisdictions through a process called general planning. Similar to transportation systems planning, findings of general planning that impact statewide corridors are included in corridor improvement and management elements.
ODOT uses the general planning process to reach implementation decisions in several circumstances: 1) for any corridor where statewide emphasis regarding transportation facilities and systems is needed; 2) to adequately analyze those portions of corridors that lie within exempt jurisdictions; and 3) where non-exempt local jurisdictions desire that ODOT take the lead for transportation planning in the corridor.
At the conclusion of Phase 2, implementation decisions reached through transportation systems planning or general planning are combined in the Corridor Improvement and Management Element. The Interim Corridor Strategy is then refined to reflect the implementation decisions made. The Corridor Improvement and Management Element, together with the corridor strategy, is adopted by OTC as the Corridor Plan.
Phase 3: Refinement Planning
Some portions of corridors may require repnement planning during Phase 3 to resolve particular land use, access management, or other issues that require a more in-depth analysis than ordinarily required to prepare a . Corridor Improvement and Management Element. The Corridor Plan may then be amended to incorporate the products of these refinement plans.
Projects and Programs
Prioritized improvements to corridor facilities, systems and management, identified in the Corridor Plan, provide the basis for update of the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) which is responsible for distributing limited transportation resources. Corridor planning is helping ODOT, with the cooperation of local governments and the input from the citizens of Oregon, make difficult funding decisions necessary to build and maintain a statewide transportation system that meets the growing demand for transportation for the next 20 years.
This Strategy is considered interim ise additional detailed analysis will be perfomed during the development of TSPs and a Corridor Improvement and Management Element that may require modifications , to the Strategy. Through this local and regional transportation system planning and refinement planning for the corridor plan, periodic review, and local plan amendments, ODOT and the local and regional governments in the corridor will cooperatively work together to ensure that city and county comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances achieve Corridor Strategy objectives. Participating jurisdictions will come to consensus on changes to the Corridor Strategy which result from TSP work.
These objectives are intended to be used as guidelines in identifying specific projects for inclusion in future updates of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and local capital improvement programs (CIPs). Inclusion of any improvements in the corridor plan does not represent a funding commitment by ODOT or any local government until programmed in the STIP andlor a local CIP. Portland-Cannon Beach lunction Corridor Overview of Corridor Plannlng
E. CORRIDOR PLANNING PARTICIPANTS
The Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor traverses four counties, affects a number of communities and several of Oregon's largest urban areas. A multi-jurisdictional approach to planning was needed. Equally important has been the involvement of the general public and various special interest groups located both on and off the corridor.
In order to coordinate and facilitate participation from such a large and diverse group, ODOT drew on the following elements: a Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG), a Public Involvement Program, and a Statewide Agency Coordinating Committee and Statewide Stakeholders Group.
Corridor Technical Advisory Group
The Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG) is composed of representatives of ODOT, other state agencies and nine regional and local governments from the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor. The CTAG has acted as a review and steering committee throughout the planning process in developing the Corridor Strategy. These agencies will be responsible for implementing the programs and projects which will be the products of the corridor planning process.
Public Involvement Program
An extensive public involvement program was held as part of the corridor planning process. This included two broadly distributed newsletters; four public open houses; briefings with local government officials, local community planning organizations, and other interest groups; and print and electronic media coverage. Input was received and information provided to over 140 persons during the course of the project. Public comments submitted at the open houses and by mail are summarized in Appendix 4.
Statewide Agency Coordinating Committee and Statewide Stakeholders
Federal and state agencies, tribal representatives, and transportation service providers have been invited to participate in a continuing Statewide Agency Coordinating Committee to help facilitate their involvement in corridor planning. Public involvement in conidor planning at the state level is being facilitated by a Statewide Stakeholders Group. The stakeholders group includes representatives of many statewide special interest groups in the transportation, land use, environmental, and social service areas. Copies of draft documents are mailed to these groups for review. Chapter 2
EXISTING AND FUTURE: CONDITIONS Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
I. GENERAL CORRIDOR OVERVIEW This chapter surveys the existing conditions of the multirnodal transportation corridor at the regional level and for each segment of the corridor, then looks to the corridor's future conditions, given current state, regional, and local plans. Land use patterns in the corridor both reflect and influence the volume and nature of transportation activity. ODOT reviewed land use, the economy, population, and employment in the corridor in order to identify the needs generated by this interaction. Information presented here is the result of field visits, a windshield survey, and many existing reports and plans (see Section VI).
A. CORRIDOR LOCATION The Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor, also known as the Sunset Highway corridor, is a multirnodal transportation system traversing both urban and rural land. It follows US 26 73.9 miles from Cannon Beach Junction to Portland, passing diagonally through the counties of Clatsop, Tillamook, Columbia, Washington, and Muitnomah (see Figure 1). In order to consider the affects of connecting non-highway transportation modes, such as rail and water ports, the boundaries of the corridor are extended to include the Port of Tillamook Bay to the south of Cannon Beach Junction.
Figure 1 Location of US 26 in Oregon
Each cornmuniij along the corridor is unique, with issues and concern that reflect the needs of local citizens and businesses. US 26 acts as a common lifeline, and actions taken by one community may affect others. In ' addition, decisions made about the future role of US 26 may affect other transportation facilities (refer to Figure 2, General Corridor Area).
B. DESCRIPTION OF THE CORRIDOR The focus of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction transportation corridor is US highway 26, also known as the Sunset Highway, which begins a few miles northeast of Cannon Beach. The highway gently winds through coniferous and deciduous forests, and slowly ascends into the Coastal Mountain Range. Many of the forests on either side of the highway are new growth or show signs of recent harvest, but the highway itself is consistently lined with trees. Leaving the mountains, the highway enters a lush agricultural region that is dotted with houses and barns. Upon crossing into the Portland Metropolitan Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), development is more predominant, though not entirely urban. Proceeding further into the cities of Beaverton, Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Hillsboro, and eventually Portland, urban housing and commercial developments abound, and the highway comes to parallel the westside light rail line. Approaching Portland, traffic shoots through the Sunset Canyon area, where the highway is framed by steep slopes covered with vegetation. The Vista Ridge tunnels out through the West Hills and the corridor ends with the intersection of US 26 with Interstate 405 in Portland.
C. PHYSICAL SETTING The corridor is a varied and scenic route, traveling through forested mountains, across farmland, past Forest Waysides, and ending with a straight stretch towards Portland through the Sunset Canyon. US 26 is a prime route from Portland to the coast, as well as to campgrounds, and rivers in the Coastal Range. Throughout the corridor, there are parks, campgrounds, hiking trails, picnic facilities, and fishing and boating resources. The Washington County Comprehensive Plan designates US 26 as a Scenic Route from the UGB to the County line meaning that it is an "excellent scenic road which offers a vista of the Tualatin Valley and the Cascade Mountains. " Figure 2
General Corridor Area Seaside :+$ I" ,-d T i x Necanicum Junction cannon 'BeacL Jewell I I
?-(> 7- Elsie ..,+,,-? AEz:- Vernonia --
='Tiliarnook Forest
Existing land uses vary from rural forests to industrial parks in this corridor. In Clatsop County, forested land accompanies scattered homesites and some tourist commercial development at the major junctions. In the central section, most of the land is forested or agricultural with scattered small farm sites. Approaching the metropolitan area, the city of North Plains provides mostly retail commercial uses along the north side of the highway. Closer to the Metro UGB, land uses are increasingly residential and industrial, and includes the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions area known as the "Silicon Forest" of Washington County. At the interchange with Highway 217, the Sunset Transit Center, an intermodal commuter station on the Westside Light Rail line, is under construction.
A. ECONOMY Transportation systems can have a significant economic impact on their surroundings. New transportation services and system improvements can act as a catalyst for new businesses, job creation, and the promotion of tourism. In general, the economy of the western portion of the corridor is closely tied to the timber and tourist industries. In the central portion, agricultural land is valued at many times the state average, and the agricultural sector provides approximately three percent of Washington County's total employment. Within the UGB economic development in this corridor is part of the larger regional economic picture.
B. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT This corridor is one of Oregon's primary growth areas. US 26 is a major route between Portland and the northern Oregon coast, so metropolitan growth affects the entire corridor. Though the western portion within Clatsop County has experienced slow population growth (under two percent per year) this is consistent with the small land area designated for residential development. The employment base for Clatsop County is the natural resources, such as forest lands and recreational areas.
Table 1 Historical Population
County 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 1995 Clatsop 30,776 27,380 28,473 32,489 33,500 34,300 Multnomah 471,537 522,813 554,668 562,647 583,500 626,500 Washington 61,269 92,237 157,920 245,860 3 13,000 370,000
Source: Portland State University, Census an8 Population Research Center,
Table 2 Histon'cal Employment
Source: Oregon Covered Employment and Payrolls, Oregon Employment Department, 1996. Note that these figures only reflect employees covered by Unemployment Insurance Program. Uncovered workers make up 15 - 20 percent of the workforce
In the eastern end, US 26 passes through Washington County, the fastest growing of the five economic submarkets of the Portland region. Since the 1970's the population and employment of Washington County Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Esisting and Future Conditions has increased significantly. The County has changed from a farming base, scattered with suburban communities, to a regional and international economic market that creates jobs for the region.
C. POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT ANALYSIS The intent of potential development impact analysis (PDIA) is to compare and contrast actual (current) residential de'nsities and the potential residential densities within rural areas expected at maximum (full) build- out, as allowed in county comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances. This analysis indicates the amount of traffic that might be generated, assesses how that traffic would impact US Highway 26, and assist in making strategic decisions in response to that development (e.g . , identify highway improvements, access management measures, etc.).
In Clatsop, Tillamook, and Columbia Counties, tax assessor maps and data, and county comprehensive plans and maps were used to determine the existing and future development patterns and to find the number and size of the parcel. In Washington County, Regional Land Information System (RLIS) was also used with the other methods to determine the existing and future development patterns and to find the number and size of the parcel.
D. TRANSPORTATION Transportation projects have an impact on the corridor's built environment and communities. Planning within the corridor must attempt to balance the expansion of transportation facilities with the protection of social, cultural, and environmental resources. This section discusses the different modes of the transportation system along the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor. Most of this information comes from the Overview of Statewide Corridors, ODOT draft January 1996; the Oregon Transportation Plan, 1992; the subsequent Oregon modal plans, and other plans and reports (see Section IV).
Intermodal Links Many modes of transportation operate separately in the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor. Though the highway is the focal point of this corridor, this plan also considers its interaction with other modes of passenger and freight transportation. For example, though Tillamook is much further south than Cannon Beach Junction, it is the terminus of rail and water ports with intermodal links that serve points along the corridor, and therefore is included within the study area. This plan's intent is to find oppo the performance of not only the individual modes, but also of intermodal connections and balance. The majority of existing intermodal passenger links are in the Portland metropolitan area.
Public Perception of the Corridor In 1993 ODOT initiated a statewide public opinion survey of Oregon drivers (Corridor Planning Public Opinion Survey, ODOT, 1993). This survey was administered to 4,000 randomly selected Oregon drivers, from which a sample of 800 was drawn from each of ODOT's five planning regions. Survey respondents favored the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction corridor for its scenic qualities and short travel time. Over 25 percent of respondents liked the ease of access most about the corridor. According to the survey, respondents had positive feelings about the safety of the highway - most "somewhat or strongly agreed that traffic lanes were wide enough and highways shoulders are satisfactory." However, the survey revealed that bicycle traffic is not considered to be safely accommodated in this corridor. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Highway System This corridor generally follows the route of US 26 from the junction with US 101, north of the city of Cannon Beach, to the junction with Interstate 405 in Portland (refer to Figure 3, Highway Network). US 26 is a primary east-west route to the Oregon coast, part of the National Highway System, and is a Highway of Statewide Importance in the Oregon Highway Plan, meaning it provides connections to larger urban areas, ports, and major recreation areas not served by interstate highways. In addition to Cannon Beach Junction, US 26 also connects Portland to Tillarnook on the north central coast, via Highway 6.
In the urban area, US 26 serves as an inter-city and intra-city commuter route, connecting several cities, including Portland, Beaverton, Hillsboro, North Plains, and Forest Grove. All along US 26, there are at- grade crossings and direct highway accesses, except for thirteen interchanges in the eastern portion.
Figure 3 Highway Network
Volumes Traffic volumes for the corridor increased steadily from 1986 to 1995 (refer to Tables 3 and 4). ODOT maintains two permanent traffic recorder stations on US 26 from Portland to the coast. One station is located 4.7 miles west of Buxton at the Sunset Tunnel (installed in 1951) and the other is at the Vista Ridge Tunnel in Portland (installed in 1969) Growth in traffic counts has been as high as eleven percent per year at various locations (ODOT traffic counts taken at the Sunset and Vista Ridge Tunnels). Traffic volumes within the corridor indicate that more than two thirds of the corridor in the eastern portion has traffic volumes under Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
10,000 vehicles per day, while the western portion of the corridor about one third experience volumes greater than 50,000 vehicles per day. Volumes are highest at the east end of the corridor near Portland, with average annual daily traffic volumes estimated at 134,700, according to 1995 ODOT traffic counts.
Travel Timr: The average 'travel time for the length of the corridor is 103 minutes for cars, and 131 minutes for trucks (calculated with ODOT's Highway Performance Monitoring System Analytical Package, HPMSAP). From Cannon Beach Junction through the Tillamook Junction with US 26, the rate of travel remains fairly constant at 1.3 minutes per mile (46 mph), then increases to one minute per mile (60 mph) from Tillamook Junction to the west edge of the Metro UGB. The rate of travel is slowest at the urban end of the corridor, at 1.7 minutes per mile (35 mph) (Overview of Corridor Planning, ODOT Draft 1996).
Table 3 Average Daily Trafic Counts, 1986-1995 4.7 miles west of Buxton at the Sunset Tunnel
Year Average Daily Volume Percent Traffic Change Change 1986 4,962 n/a n/a 1987 5,433 47 1 9% 1988 5,489 56 1 % 1989 5,535 46 1 % 1990 5,532 -3 0% 1991 6,147 615 11% 1992 6,321 174 3% 1993 6,192 -129 -2 % 1994 6,299 107 2% 1995 6,404 105 2% 1986-1995 - 1,442 29 %
Source: ODOT Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Table 4 Average Daily Traflc Counts 1986-1995 Vista Ridge Tunnel
Source: ODOT
According to ODOT's Overview of Corridor Planning (1996) and the HPMSAP, over half of the corridor regularly experiences a low level of congestion (refer to Table 5), meaning that the highway is operating at a level of service (LOS) of C or better (see Appendix for explanation of LOS and congestion). Much of the congestion in the corridor can be described as "recurring," found on a predictable basis at various locations. While in the western end, congestion is tourist-related with seasonal peaks, the highest congestion levels occur between the Metro UGB and 1-405. ODOT estimates that 30-40 percent of peak period congestion may be caused by incidents.
Table 5 1996 Proportion of Corridor Subject to Congestion
Source: Overview of Statewide Corridors, 1996.
. . dway Con- Adequate roadway conditions are necessary to meet the OTP goals regarding accessibility, levels of service, and reduced congestion. The Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) identifies minimum tolerable conditions (MTCs) for lane width and shoulder width for a statewide highway.
Roadway geometry addresses the highway's physical configuration, including lane widths, curvature, and alignment. The target MTCs for US 26 are a minimum lane width of 11 feet in urban sections and 12 feet in Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions rural sections. Shoulder width targets are six feet minimum in sections where average annual daily traffic is greater than 2,000, and four feet minimum in rural sections with average annual daily traffic volumes less than 2,000. ODOT's inventory indicates that approximately 75 percent of US 26 currently meets that standard. There are also a few portions of highway with substandard vertical and horizontal curves, resulting in delays due to slow moving vehicles and reduced safety in those segments.
The OHP caHs for improving and maintaining pavement surface to fair or better condition. The majority of US 26 has pavement surface in fair or better condition, however there are segments, especially in the rural areas, that do not meet that standard.
One of the chief indicators of highway safety is the accident rate. Overall, the safety of the corridor is adequate, except for some areas with accident or fatality rates exceeding statewide averages. ODOT collects and analyzes accident data through its Safety Priority Index System (SPIS). A SPIS accident rate is the number of reported accidents per million vehicle miles of highway travel. The SPIS system allows comparison of accident rates and levels of severity at accident sites statewide. It also identifies intersections or sections of roadway that rate in the top ten percent of accident locations, warranting further study of ways to reduce the number or severity of accidents.
1992 - 1994 SPIS data for the US 26 corridor shows that a few locations are classified as high accident sites. In 1992, the number of high accident locations per mile for the US 26 corridor was 1.84, compared to the statewide average of 0.54. The overall accident rate per million vehicle miles of travel was 0.53, compared to the statewide average of 0.83. Data from 1991-1993 classifies over half of the accidents on US 26 between Cannon Beach Junction and Portland as "rear-end" accidents, followed by "sideswipe overtaking" and "faxed object." When considering options for improving the overall safety of the highway, it is worth noting that data attributed only 15 percent of accidents in this time period to intersections or access. Other significant factors were night (32 percent), wet (20 percent), and icy (13 percent) conditions (Overview of Statewide Corridors, ODOT, 2.27).
ODOT's Corridor Safety Improvement Program (CSIP) stresses the low-cost accident counter-measures to highway collision problems. Highway and traffic engineers are brought together with local traffic safety associations, enforcement agencies, emergency medical services personnel and the public to devise a plan to reduce traffic fatalities, injures and property damage. Problems well-suited to CSIP treatments include: Stretches of roadway with concentration of traffic crashes 0 Crash problems with common contributing factors Stretches of roadways with common crash types 0 Concentrations of cashes where driver awareness is a problem General disregard for speed limits Demonstrated low safety belt usage Alcohol and other drug involvement
In addition to automobile accidents, the forested landscape of this corridor poses additional safety risks. Wildfires burning near highways can put the motoring public temporarily at risk, and significant congestion occurs as fire fighters attempt to deal with the emergency. Hazards of rolling debris, falling trees, and dense smoke can exist long after the passage of the fire.
Another concern in the corridor is seismic retrofitting of bridges on US 26, such as Quartz Creek Bridge. The ODOT Bridge section has established a program to evaluate structures thought out the state. Several Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions bridge structures need to be studied to determine the direction for bridge maintenance and replacement within the corridor.
Truck volumes in the corridor vary. While 53.4 miles of the corridor sees volumes of under 499 trucks a day (mostly in the western portion), eleven miles of the corridor carries 1,500-2,999 trucks a day, and three miles of the corridor carries more than 3,000 trucks a day. Truck traffic volumes for the US 26 corridor indicate that there are currently less than 500 trucks per day traveling the highway between Cannon Beach Junction and Portland.
Products carried by trucks along the corridor include raw and processed wood, agricultural products, and high tech equipment and goods. State and private forests near US 26 are working forests, with their primary purpose being the growing and harvesting of forest crops. This makes the highway a necessity for loggers, forest managers, and their equipment. State forests are not the major contributor to log truck traffic on US 26, but the Department of Forestry currently estimates that trucks related to state timber sales carry 20 loads per day in the winter and 50 loads per day in the summer on US 26. Due to the age of the State Forests, harvest levels are expected to increase and result in a doubling of truck traffic within the next five years. No data is available on truck traffic from private forest lands.
Other Transportation Modes
Service The following public use airports operate in the vicinity of the corridor (refer to Figure 4, Existing Public Airports) :
Portland-Hillsboro Seaside Municipal Tillamook Astoria Regional Vernonia Municipal Nehalem Bay State Portland International ( I'BX) Skyport (Cornelius) Stark's Twin Oak Airport (Hillsboro)
Table 6 provides an inventory of the existing public use airports in corridor. Portland International Airport provides statewide, national, and international flights for the corridor residents. Portland-Hillsboro Airport provides commercial and business services for the corridor, but not regularly scheduled commercial flights. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Table 6 Inventory of Existing PublicAirports Airport Planning Number of Annual Operations Templates* Runways Estimates Astoria SCSB 2 46,900 Newern Bay State SGA 1 13,000 Portland - Hillsboro SCSB 2 215,000 Portland International n/a 3 270,000 Seaside Municipal SGA 1 7,300 Skyport (Cornelius) SGA 1 1 ,000 Stark's Twin Oak SGA 1 12,800 Airpark (Hillsboro) TiUamook MGA 2 10,000 Vernonia SGA 1 1,200
* Planning Templates: SGA = Small general aviation, MGA = Medium general aviation, SCSB = Small Commercial servicehusiness. Source: The Airport Technology and Planning Group, Inc.
Figure 4 Existing Public Airports
Iia Seaside Municipal \
'- Cannon Beac ,'
j --- - - I, \ Nehalern Bay State 1 I
Stark's Twin 0 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Bicycle use in the corridor consists of two general types - urban cycling for commuting purposes, and urban and rural recreational cycling. Bicycle facilities, either as a bike lane or a bikeway utilizing the roadway shoulder, are not provided throughout most of US 26. Neither are the road shoulder widths adequate for cycling. Cyclists sometimes find roadway shoulders littered with gravel and debris, making them difficult to use. There is also a potential for conflict with truck traffic, especially in the western end of the corridor, where there are narrow shoulders in the rural portions of the corridor. Many riders currently use the local street system through the urban area, then connect with US 26 in the rural area for trips to the Oregon coast.
Pedestrians Most of the pedestrian activity is in the urban areas. In the rural area, there are few pedestrian trip generators or destinations due to the rural development patterns. Small communities along the highway, such as Manning, Elsie, and Camp 18, do provide services for recreation traffic, and there are pedestrian facilities for crossing US 26 at many interchanges.
There is no intercity public transit service servicing the entire length of the corridor, but at times private intercity bus connections exist between Portland and the coast. Transit service is strong within the urban area of the corridor.
1 Service There are several freight rail lines in the corridor, primarily carrying lumber products and cattle feed for dairies in Tillarnook (refer to Figure 5, Existing Rail Lines). One active line, the Port of Tillarnook Bay (POTB) Railroad, runs from the Port of Tillamook, on the coast, up through the corridor to Hillsboro. This rail line runs next to or near US 26 between Buxton and Banks Junctions. There is also a Burlington Northern line that runs from North Plains to the mail line in Portland Yard. Some rail lines serve as secondary connections from this corridor to northern or southern destinations, while others are currently inactive.
There is currently no regularly scheduled passenger rail service in the corridor, however, there is excursion train service for sightseeing and dinner on the Coastal Express. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditiotzs
Figure 5 Existing Rail Lines
/ Cannon ~e'acfi-
I
There are no water ports within this corridor. However, the facilities within the corridor act as linkages to ports at both ends. The closest large ports at Astoria, Portland, and St. Helens, are deep draft ports with rail and highway connections. The Port of Tillamook Bay, south of Cannon Beach, is connected to the US 26 corridor by the POTB railroad (refer to Figure 6, Existing Water Ports). There are two other ports in Tillamook County, the Ports of Garibaldi and Nehalem, which are linked to the US 26 corridor via Highway 101.
At many places within the corridor, there are oil and natural gas pipelines.
According to the OTP, improvements in telecommunications technology will impact transportation by decreasing commuting distances as employees work at home or in decentralized offices. Telecommunication opportunities exist within the corridor since many residents of the corridor own personal computers. A portion of the corridor passes through the high tech industrial area between the Metro UGB and Highway 217; this type of industry may provide telecommuting opportunities. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Figure 6 Existing Water Ports
i \
$\ \ 1% .- Astoria
------r Cannon Beach -
St. Heiens $ COLUMBIA 4,
111. CORRIDOR SEGMENTS The Portland - Cannon Beach Junctior! transportation corridor is highway-based and multimodal, passing through urban and rural environments. To clearly assess the strengths and needs of the corridor, this section examines each of its segments, proceeding from west to east, examining the segment in three topical areas: e Land Use and Environmental Features r Cultural and Recreational Resources Transportation System
Different environments exist in each of the corridor's seven segments. Each segment has an identifiable boundary and generally uniform traffic and terrain characteristics. Figure 7 illustrates the corridor segmentation. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Figure 7 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Segments
- - \ - \ Astoria \ -.-.- \
A. SEGMENT 1 - CANNON BEACH JUNCTION (US 101) TO NECANICUM JUNCTION (OR 53) Segment One covers 9.4 niles from Cannon Beach Junction (US 101) to Necanicum Junction (refer to Figure 8).
Land Use and Environmental Features The physical character of Segment One is relatively level and rolling, with predominantly deciduous vegetation. The Atlas of Oregon identifies roughly one-half of this segment as part of the coastal Sitka spruce zone, and the second half as part of the western hemlock zone. This area includes many farm-related land uses, rural residential development, and an unincorporated residential settlement at Necanicum Junction, all of which have direct highway access.
There are many creeks and rivers along this first segment. The Necanicum River parallels US 26 from approximately Cannon Beach Junction to Necanicum Junction (Oregon 53), providing habitat for various types of fish and other wildlife. The river is a prime stream for anadromous fish runs and provides water for the City of Seaside. The Nehalem River crosses under US 26, and has been designated as a Scenic Waterway in the Oregon State Parks Six-Year Plan (official designation has not yet been given). The segment includes several creek crossings (Meyer, Volmer, Salmon, Johnson, Mall, Undsley, Alder, Wolf, Little Humbug, and Charlie), and a fish hatchery at approximately the 7.0 mile marker. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Cultural and Recreational Resources While the coast features many recreational activities, there are also valuable recreational facilities as the corridor heads inland. Along this segment, these include the Klootchie Creek picnic and camp grounds (a private park owned by Crown Zellerbach), and a picnic ground at Black Bridge. The Necanicum and Nehalem Rivers offer opportunities for recreational activities, including fishing. In addition, the dedication of a World War I1 Memorial located at the Highway 53 junction prompted the name of US 26 to change from the Wolf Creek Highway to the Sunset Highway.
Transportation Systems
US 26 begins at an interchange with US 101, a scenic highway that runs along the Oregon coast. Farther east in Necanicum Junction, US 26 intersects with OR 53, which runs south to Nehalem Bay. In this section, the highway has two lanes and shoulder widths varying between two and ten feet. The operating level of service (LOS) of this section is "C or better" (see Appendix for explanation), and the pavement conditions are "good. "
This segment has a history of accident rates higher than the state average. Its rural accident rate of 1.31 accidents per million vehicle miles of highway traveled exceeds the statewide rural accident rate of 0.87. This is also one of the segments reporting accidents with fatality rates higher than the statewide average. The types of accidents in these segments are mainly rear-end or fixed object accidents involving automobiles (Overview of Statewide Corridors: Portland - Cannon Beach Junction, Highway Accident Analysis, ODOT, June, 1995).
Both public and private intercity transit providers serve Segment One. The Sunset Empire Transit District provides transit service for Clatsop County at the western end of the corridor, and North Coast Transit services Cannon Beach and Astoria.
The highway shoulder widths in Segment One are between four and six feet on both sides of the highway (ODOT Inventory Map, 1996).
South of Cannon Beach, the Port of Tillamook Bay (POTB) railroad operates at Tillamook. This rail line, approximately 89 miles long does not parallel the highway, but provides a freight link between the Portland metropolitan area and the Oregon coast. The Oregon Tillamook Railroad Authority, a joint state-port agency, controls the railroad. Traffic generated on the POTB, predominately outbound lumber products and inbound feed grains, totals less than 500,000 gross tons per year.
Within the first segment of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor, water port activity is another important mode of transportation. Intermodal connections involving the ports can be strong links for transporting freight through the corridor. Tillarnook County is home to three port sites, the largest of which is the multirnodal industrial water port at the Port of Tillarnook Bay (POTB). Currently, the port serves the lumber and feed industries, both of which then travel inland by rail. Figure 8 Segment One: US 101 to Necanicum Jct. Mile Posts 0.0 to 9.40 g 5 , Transportation Features "-3 8 Environmental-.- -.- - - . .. - -- Features-- . Land - Use- and Cultural-. - . .Features - -.------. ------E! - Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
\ B. SEGMENT 2 - NECANICUM JUNCTION (OR 53) TO EAST HUMBUG CREEK The second segment of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor covers 7.97 miles, beginning at Necanicum Junction and ending at East Humbug Creek (refer to Figure 9).
Land Use and Environmental Features In this segment, the highway enters the Coast Mountain Range and the surrounding land is almost entirely forested. Natural vegetation here is part of the western hemlock zone. The road climbs steep slopes and reaches a summit of 1,309 feet above sea level. Much of the land directly adjacent to US 26 is protected as a Forest Wayside. There is an elk refuge northwest of Elsie Park. Here the highway crosses the Necanicum and Nehalem Rivers, as well as several creeks (Little N. Fork, W. Humbug, and E. Fork Humbug).
Cultural and Recreational Resources This segment passes through two Sunset Highway Forest Waysides and the entrance to David Douglas Park at mile post 13.58. Saddle Mountain State Park is approximately three miles north of segment two, accessed by a road that intersects US 26 at the 10.58 mile post.
Transportation System
While the majority of this section is a two-lane highway, there is one four-lane section between mile posts 10.11 and 13.91 which allows passing, and also a slow moving vehicle lane(west bound) from mile posts 13.91 to 15.12. Segment Two's accident rate of 1.11 accidents per million vehicle miles of travel exceeds the statewide average. The operating LOS of the segment varies between C and D, while the pavement conditions modulate between good, fair, and poor. The highway's shoulder widths are under four feet. Blcvcle For the first half of this segment, the highway's shoulders are generally four to six feet wide on either side, with several short stretches where the shoulders are over six feet wide. After the road reaches the Coast Range summit, however, the shouiders are under four feet wide. Figure 9 Segment 2: Necanicum Jet.to E. Humbug Creek Mile Posts 9.40 to 17.3 7
Environmental -.Features Land.. Use. and Cultural Features
I MILE 4 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
C. SEGMENT 3 - EAST HUMBUG CREEK TO JEWELL JUNCTION Segment Three, 4.44 miles long, lies between East Humbug Creek and a Western Highway Wayside boundary (refer to Figure 10).
Land Use and Environmental Features In Segment Three, US 26 is relatively flat as it continues through the western hemlock zone. Intermittent farm-related development occurs here, and limited services are available in the unincorporated communities of Elsie and Jewell Junction. A portion of the segment is part of Clatsop State Forest lands, and located to the north is Jewell Wildlife Area.
In Clatsop County, the Nehalem River crosses under US 26 east of Elsie at Timber Junction. It is identified in the Oregon State Parks Six-Year Plan as a Scenic Waterway and in the Clatsop County Comprehensive Plan as Open Space. In this segment, the highway crosses four creeks: Alder, Larsen, Cedar, and Osweg.
Cultural and Recreational Resources This segment of the highway passes two cultural markers. Located south of US 26 near the beginning of the segment, Camp 18 is a restaurant and gift shop that features large wood carvings and historic logging memorabilia. The Sunnyhill Cemetery is approximately halfway between Elsie and Jewell Junction, immediately south of the highway.
Transportation System
US 26 continues as a two-lane road along segment three, with shoulder widths under four feet. Pavement quality in this area is "good." This segment has many connections to other parts of the region. Lower Nehalem Road joins the highway at Elsie, extending southeast to Nehalem Bay on the Oregon Coast. Fishhawk Falls Highway meets US 26 at Jewell Junction, continuing north into Nehalem Valley and providing access to US 202.
This section has a mra! accident rate of 1.38, which exceeds the statewide average. Accident types in Segment Three include mostly rear-end, some fixed-object, and some turning accident types. Nighttime and wet conditions affect accident rates (Overview of Statewide Corridors: Poaland - Cannon Beach Junction, Highwq Accident Analysis, QDOT, 1996).
The highway shoulders in Segment Three are under four feet wide on both sides, creating less than desirable conditions for cycling. Figure 10 Segment 3: E. Humbug Creek to Western Wayside Boundary Mile Posts 17.37 to 21.81 g i Environmental Features Transportation Features 9 Land Use and Cultural Features E
1 MILE 1 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
D. SEGMENT 4 - JEWELL JUNCTION TO STALEYS JUNCTION (OR 47) Segment Four is 21.81 miles long. It begins at the western Wayside boundary and ends at Staleys Junction (Oregon 47) (refer to Figures 11 and 12).
Land Use add Environmental Features This segment is generally in public and private forest use as it continues through the western hemlock vegetation zone with relatively gentle terrain. There is some rural residential development at mile 37.60, where Timber Vernonia Roads cross US 26. Surrounding land forms change as the highway cuts through the Coast Mountain Range, reaching a summit of 1,642 feet at mile 26.85. Although the highway occasionally borders steep slopes to the north along Segment Four, the soils are soft. Here the highway crosses many creeks (South Fork Quartz, Rock, Bear, and North Fork Wolf), and the Nehalem River. While most of these creek crossings consist of drainage pipes, Rock Creek and the Nehalem River require bridges over small gulches.
Cultural and Recreational Resources Sunset Highway Forest Wayside encapsulates much of Segment Four. There is a Sunset Safety Rest Area at mile 28.65, and a scenic pullout at milepost 32 near the Washington/Tillamook County line.
Transportation System
Hlghwav Within this long segment, US 26 provides a connection to Banks and Vernonia via Oregon 47. Local areas west of Staleys Junction have direct access to the highway, but access is controlled at Staleys Junction (Oregon 47).
The performance of the highway in this section is somewhat related to the terrain as it passes through the Coastal Range. In its first .47 miles, the highway is divided, and once it rejoins, it alternates between two, three, and four lanes due to the steep grades. The LOS is "C or better" in the western portion, but drops to B in the mountainous terrain. The pavement condition varies from "poor" to "good," and shoulder widths are between four and six feet. At mile 40.84, the highway passes through the Sunset Tunnel, which i.; approximately one-sixth of a mile long. Though this segment has accident rates lower than the statewi - average, it is one of the corridor segments with highway fatality rates exceeding the statewide rural averag: The types of accidents in these segments are mamly rear-end or fixed object accidents involving automobiles (OBOT).
Ul The Port of Tillamook Bay Railroad crosses US 26 at mile post 42.5 via an overpass. Blcvcle The road conditions for bicycles in Segment Four are favorable, though still fall short of providing bike lanes. The shoulders of the highway in this segment are mostly between four and six feet wide, though there are short sections where they are over six or under four feet on one side or the other (ODOT Inventory Map, 1996). Bicycle accessibility, however, is limited; bicycles are not allowed in the Sunset Tunnel. Figure I I Segment 4: Western Wayside Boundary to OR 47 (part I) Mile Posts 21.81 to 45.5
. Transportation Features . .. .- - . -
. - --.- .I MILE sa~ril~aa-jiinj~na pui asn -puq
S 'SP 01 18'1Z SlSOd al!N ('wad) ~p 01 rtropunog ap!sdv~uAalsaM :p 1tlau18as ZI amS!d Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
E. SEGMENT 5 - STALEYS JUNCTION (OR 47) TO TILLAMOOK JUNCTION (OR 6) Segment Five covers 7.8 miles, and extends from Staleys Junction (OR 47) to Tillamook Junction (OR 6) (refer to Figure 13).
Land Use and Environmental Features Farming primarily occupies Segment Five, with some isolated rural residential development. It passes through three unincorporated communities with very limited services: Staleys Junction (45.48 mile post), Manning (47.46 mile post), and Davies (49.35 mile post). The unincorporated community of Buxton lies approximately one-half mile north of US 26 on Fisher Road. The West Fork Dairy Creek parallels the highway in this segment.
Cultural and Recreational Features Segment Five passes two cemeteries at Staleys Junction, the Buxton Catholic Cemetery and the Buxton Protestant Cemetery. From the north in Vernonia, the Banks-Vernonia Linear Park, a state park, travels from Staleys Junction to Davies Junction.
Transportation System
As Segment Five leaves the Coastal Range, the highway becomes markedly less steep. Here the highway has two lanes, and the pavement conditions are "good" or "fair." The Nehalem Highway (Oregon 47), which joins US 26 at Staleys Junction, allows access to Vernonia (population 1,870), and continues north to join the Columbia River Highway at Clatskanie (pop. 1,810). Oregon 47 follows US 26 east to Davies, where it turns south to Banks (pop. 570) and Forest Grove (pop. 14,010). From Banks, there is access south to Tillamook via Oregon 6.
There are turning lanes in Manning and a left turn lane with a flashing yellow light at Sellers Road.
Aiong this section of the corridor, US 26 has accident rates lower than the statewide average for rural areas. The mral accident rate is 0.57 accidents per million vehicle miles of highway travel, while the statewide average is 0.87. The highway fatality rate in this segment is 2.26 fatalities per hundred million vehicle miles of travel, compared to the statewide average of 3.11.
' Bicycle conditions in Segment Five are greatly improved over previous those of previous segments. Along the majority of the highway in this segment, the shoulders are over six feet wide.
There are no pedestrian facilities along US 26, though in this segment there are pedestrian facilities in close proximity to the corridor in Banks-Vernonia Linear Park. There is also some pedestrian activity in the Manning commercial area, midway through Segment Five.
B;ul The Port of Tillamook Bay Railroad parallels US 26 in Segment 5, crossing at Davies Junction to follow Oregon 47 southeast through Banks. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Furure Conditions Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
F. SEGMENT 6 - TILLAMOOK JUNCTION (OR 6) TO THE WEST EDGE OF METRO UGB Segment Six covers 7.8 miles and extends from Tillamook Junction to the Portland Metropolitan Area Urban Growth Boundary (Metro UGB). This segment is popular with urban commuters west of Portland (refer to Figure 14).
Physical and Environmental Features The predominant feature of this segment is its agrarian landscape, bordered on the north by Pumpkin Ridge and the Tualatin Mountains. The Atlas of Oregon identifies soils in this area as well-suited for grazing or forestry, and much of the land along the highway in this segment is zoned for Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) by Washington County. An exception to this is the City of North Plains between mile post 56.24 and mile post 57.50 (population 1,025). Several creeks traverse this segment, including Bledsoe, East Fork Dairy, Relief Channel, McKay, and Stoney. Significant Natural Areas for wetlands are associated with McKay Creek, and the east and west forks of Dairy Creek, all of which cross under the highway.
Cultural and Recreational Resources While this segment has fewer recreational resources, it does include some places of cultural importance. The Joseph Meek Historical Marker is north of US 26 at approximately mile 58.5 and the Harrison Cemetery is south of US 26 on Dersham Road.
Transportation System
Though it is still outside the Metro UGB, this portion of US 26 serves commuters at the western edge of the Portland Metropolitan Area, including the municipalities of Banks, Forest Grove, Cornelius, and North Plains. Segment Six marks the beginning of the highway as a limited access, four lane road. Oregon Highway 6 (Wilson River Highway) intersects US 26 at Tillarnook Junction, and continuing to the City of Tillamook on the Oregon coast. Glencoe Road, a major route for transporting agricultural goods from area nurseries and farms, intersects US 26 at North Plains and accesses Hillsboro (population 40,350) to the south.
In this segment there are two at-grade road crossing with US 26. One is at the Mountaindale/Roy Road intersection (mile post 53.62) and the other is had Jackson School Road (mile post 58.62). Jackson School Road has a left-turn lane and a flashing yellow light.
As the highway approaches the metropolitan area, its LOS drops from level D to E, and the pavement conditions are "good" or "fair." This segment's highway accident rate, 0.29, was lower than the statewide average for rural areas, 0.87. The highway fatality rate in Segment Six was 0.74 fatalities per hundred million vehicle miles of travel, compared with the statewide rate of 3.11.
One private airport, Eagle Airstrip, is located approximately one-quarter mile north of US 26 in North Plains. Portland-Hillsboro Airport is approximately 4 miles south of US 26 at the Jackson School Road intersection. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
&ill Running 11 miles from Banks east to Bowers Junction, a Portland and Western branch transports under one million gross tons per mile. This line interchanges with the POTB line at Hillsboro. Figure 14 Segment 6: OR 6 to W. Edge of Portland Metro UGB Mile Posts 53.3 to 61.1
.. A . .- ..- -- - Environmental Features Land ___Use and Cultural.----.... .-.Features ...... ~rans~ort~tionFeatures
- .. - -- -. .1 MILE A3 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
G. SEGMENT 7 - WEST EDGE OF THE METRO UGB TO 1-405 Segment Seven covers 12.89 miles and extends from the Metro UGB, at Helvetia and Shute Roads, to the Sunset Highway's eastern terminus at Interstate 405 (refer to Figure 15).
Land Use and Environmental Features The western portion of Segment Seven includes a mix of urban development and farmland in the rolling, fertile valley. Here US 26 passes the northern edge of the Cities of Hillsboro (population 40,350) and Beaverton (pop. 58,785), then through a large portion of unincorporated Washington County. Land uses in Hillsboro and Beaverton include multiple and single family dwellings, as well as office, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses. In this area, US 26 also passes the smaller, unincorporated communities of West Union, Cedar Hills, Somerset West, Marlene Village, and Cedar Mill. These are primarily residential communities with limited services. Along the highway, there are large industrial park sites that focus on high tech companies and comprise the area known at the "Silicon Forest" of Washington County.
West of the US 26lHighway 217 interchange, there is a wildlife habitat area at the east and west ends of the Barnes Road ramps. There is also a wetland and wildlife area associated with Johnson Creek in the same vicinity. The Washington County Cedar Hills/Cedar Mill Community Plan designates both of these areas as Significant Natural Resource Areas. Other Significant Natural Resource designations in the Washington County portion of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor include Willow Creek, Bronson Creek and Rock Creek, all of which cross under the highway in culverts.
Approaching the City of Portland, the highway enters a hilly, forested area consisting primarily of residential development. This area, in the Willamette ForestIPrairie zone, is part of the Tualatin Mountains. Here US 26 encounters steep grades as it passes through the hills west of downtown, by the unincorporated community of Sylvan, and descends into Portland (population 458,275). This is the most heavily traveled segment of US 26.
In this segment, the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor passes through the Westside, one of the five economic submarkets of the Portland region. The Westside has been the fastest growing submarket in the region, capturing 68.3 percent of the region's population growth, 47.6 percent of the growth in single-family housing, 52.7 percent of the growth in multifmily housing, and 96.1 percent of the regional employment growth between 1980 and 1987.
B ceks in this segment include Rock Creek, Bronson Creek, Willow Creek, Cedar Mill Creek, Johnson Creek and Golf Creek. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Cultural and Recreational Resources Being the most urban segment of the highway, this segment boasts many cultural attractions as well as important recreational resources in the vicinity of US 26. There are a number of small, community-oriented recreational attractions along the highway in Segment Seven, including Rock Creek Country Club, Rock Creek Park, Somerset West Park, Bronson Creek Park, Willow Creek Nature Park, Pioneer Park, Sunset Park, Peppertree, and Forest Hills. Educational facilities within this segment include the Oregon Graduate Institute (OGI), located south of US 26, and Portland Community College (PCC) at Rock Creek, north of US 26. St. Vincent's Hospital, a full-service hospital with medical offices, is located near the northeast quadrant of the Highway 217 interchange. The highway forms the southern border to a large cemetery, the Sunset Hills Memorial Park before the Canyon Road intersection.
West of the US 26lHighway 217 interchange is the Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District building, which includes swimming and other sports facilities. Along the highway corridor there are several churches, schools and small parks within the urban area.
For approximately 1.25 miles in the Sunset Canyon, the highway passes to the immediate south of Washington Park, a major recreation destination in the Portland Metropolitan Area. Washington Park offers wooded trails and an arboretum, the Washington Park Zoo, International Rose Test Gardens, Japanese Gardens, and World Forestry Center.
Transportation System
US 26 intersects Shute Road at the beginning of segment seven, providing access southwest to the Portland- Hillsboro Airport and the City of Hillsboro. Cornelius Pass Road continues north through West Union to US 30. Highway 217 provides access south to Beaverton and 1-5. Between these two major routes, there are four other intersections: 185th Avenue, 158th Avenue, Murray Boulevard, and Barnes Road. These provide radial access to outlying Portland area communities. The US 26lHighway 217 Interchange is also being reconfigured to accommodate light rail. All these improvements should be complete by 1998.
Closer to the city, the highway features access to Washington Park and the residential area of the West Hills before entering the grid street pattern of Portland. The highway passes under the Portland West Hills in the Vista Ridge Tunnel. US 26 allows access to 1-405, a radial distributor for the City of Portland. Finally, Segment Seven ends with the 1-405 intersection.
Most congestion on this section of the highway is associated with commuter traffic, especially in the morning and evening peak hours. There is significant truck traffic in the urban end of the corridor, mainly for local delivery and transport for local businesses and homes. This is one of the corridor segments with accident rates lower than the statewide average.
Over the entire segment, the highway accident rate is .65 reported accidents per million vehicle miles of highway travel, which is much lower than the statewide average for urban corridors, 3.69.
The pavement conditions in Segment Seven are "very good." Blcvcles The only bicycle shoulders along US 26 in the urban area are from the Vista Ridge Tunnel to Sylvan, where the highway has striped bike lanes. Bicycle shoulders are provided from Highway 217 to Shute Road, though Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions the bicycle shoulders between Sylvan and 217 are insignificant due to physical constraints. Within the Metro UGB, bicyclists use surface streets that parallel US 26 into downtown Portland.
New overcrossings at Murray Boulevard, Cornell Road, Bethany Road, 185th Avenue, Cornelius Pass Road, and Helvetia Road (Shute Road) include pedestrian facilities.
city Tm Portland is an intercity transit hub at the east end of the corridor. Light rail transit adjacent to US 26 should begin operating in 1998 from downtown Portland to the US 26lHighway 217 Interchange, where it turns south and continues through Beaverton to Hillsboro. Tri-Met bus service that offers connections at the Cedar Hills Transit Center, which will be relocated to the Sunset Transit Center on Barnes Road (at the northwest quadrant of US 26lHighway 217) in 1998. Bus stops are located along US 26 eastbound between Highway 217 and downtown Portland, and both eastbound and westbound at the Zoo and Sylvan Interchange. Bus service from this transit center provides connections to the eastern Portland Metropolitan area via bus or light rail, and to Vancouver, Washington via bus from the Portland downtown transit mall. There is also service from the transit mall to the Portland Airport, and to the Greyhound Bus Station and the Arntrak station in northwest Portland, as well as to other parts of the City.
There are currently park and ride facilities available at the 158thlBethany Road/Cornell Road Interchange, Cedar Hills Boulevard at Butner Road, 143rdlCornel1, and at the Cornelius Pass Road at US 26 in the SE quadrant. The lot at Betharny RoadICornell Road is temporary until completion of the Westside Light Rail line in 1997. At that time, permanent park and ride facilities, bus service, and light rail service will operate at the Sunset Transit Center at Barnes Road and US 26. There will also be a park and ride facility on NW 185th Avenue at Baseline Road for bus and light rail to and from Hillsboro and Portland.
Railroad The Port of Tillamook Bay Railroad line continues its route from Tillamook through Hillsboro. The line then drops south through Tigard to Durham, where the interchange includes a connection to the main line. Running along the Willamette River, this line connects the corridor to the Port of Portland rail yards and intermodal facilities in Portland.
The Southern Pacific oil pipeline c ,ses US 26 west of Cedar Hills. A Northwest Natural Gas pipeline also crosses the corridor in this general vicinity and there is a gas distribution pipeline just east of Hillsboro. Figure 15 Segment 7: W. Edge of Portland Metro UGB to 1-405 Mile Posts 61.1 to 73.9 s. $- . Transportation Features Environmental Features I ------. --...... --.--.-..-. . - -.-- - .---...---- Land- Use and Cultural Features.- .. .. . ,. . ..- -. ------.- - $8
.i MILE ~3 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
IV. FUTURE CONDITIONS
In order to plan for the future of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor as a multimodal transportation corridor, it is important to understand the existing conditions, as well as the forces that will influence and change those conditions. Information on future land use patterns in the corridor comes from adopted comprehensive plans, and Metro's 2040 Growth Concept for the Portland Metropolitan region. ODOT obtained information on anticipated development from respective local jurisdictions, and forecasts for population and employment are from the Oregon Transportation Plan, 1992. Future transportation system information is based on the ODOT Highway Performance Management Systems analysis.
The US 26 Corridor will continue to play a key role as a multimodal transportation system. Future land use patterns will focus development at nodes along the highway. Transit service will play a larger role in the urban corridor with the completion of the Westside Light Rail. ODOT has analyzed the land use and transportation inter-relationship and population and employment growth. Resources included the 2040 Growth Concept and Map and the adopted comprehensive plans listed under Section E, Relevant Plans and Policies, as well as the Overview of Statewide Corridors report.
A. LAND USE AND ECONOMY Transportation improvements in the corridor must be balanced among modes, and must also consider potential environmental, energy, social, and economic impacts. According to the OTP, the design, construction and operation of the transportation system should "positively affect both the natural and built environment ...where adverse affects can not be avoided, minimize or mitigate their affect on the environment. "
Rural Area In Clatsop County, most land west of Highway 53 along US 26 is designated for rural uses. These lands will continue to be sparse settlement, small farms, or large acreage homesites with no or little public service, which are not intended for urban uses. Farther east, the area along the US 26 corridor is almost exclusively in conservation-forest lands (refer to Figure 16, Generalized Land Uses). As state forest lands such as the Tillamook Burn area become available for renewed harvesting, increasing activity could significantly impact the forestry sector in both Washington and Tillamook Counties. Tourism will be another important factor in the future economy of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor, especially in Clatsop County. Continued population growth in the Portland area will greatly affect existing tourist-oriented development along the highway. The economy in the corridor outside the UGB will continue to rely on forestry and agricultural products
The Washington County Comprehensive Plan - RurallNatural Resource Plan guides future land uses in the corridor area of Washington County. This plan designates most future land uses as either Exclusive Farm Use or Exclusive Forest and Conservation.
Washington County does not seem to have rural areas where designated land uses will cause significant impacts on the corridor. Overall, with the county's rural minimum acreage requirements of 5 acres, it appears unlikely that the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction corridor will be significantly impacted by the currently designated patterns for future growth in Washington County.
Neither are there Potential Development Impact Areas (PDIA) in Tillamook and Columbia Counties along the corridor. This section is primarily forest lands, with no exception lands. In Clatsop County there are only two potential development areas. The first is around Jewel1 Junction, and the other is from Necanicum 2 - 33 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Junction to Cannon Beach Junction. The amount of potential development within these areas, however, should not significantly impact the highway.
The Metro 2040 Growth Concept Plan Map designates the area along US 26 from the Metro UGB to North Plains as a Green Corridor. The intent is to maintain urban accessibility to encourage employment growth, but also limit impacts to the non-urban uses of the rural reserve area. Green Corridor requirements include protection and preservation of an open space with no development. Metro will need to secure a cooperative agreement with the affected Washington County, North Plains, and ODOT to impose the Green Corridor requirements along this section of US 26.
Urban Area Development within the Portland Metropolitan UGB will follow the Metro 2040 Growth Concept (refer to Figure 16, Generalized Land Uses). The section of US 26 approaching Portland includes several Town Center locations on the 2040 Growth Concept Plan Map. The intent of the Town Center designation is to provide areas of mixed residential and employment uses with local shopping opportunities. Westside light rail and transit developments will have a great impact on the future land uses in this area corridor. Road improvements to this section of US 26 will be minimal, since plans encourage transit and pedestrian and bicycle access.
Figure 16 Generalized Land Uses Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Washington County, the local jurisdictions of Hillsboro. Beaverton, and Portland, and Metro have plans addressing future development on land in the corridor, including:
Washington County has land use jurisdiction from Cornelius Pass Road to the Multnomah County line. Planned land uses are predominantly residential (single and multi-family), but include some significant retail, office, and industrial uses. The northwest quadrangle of the US 26lHighway 217 interchange is planned for high density office, retail and residential development. This will support the Sunset Transit Center and a major light rail station and park and ride, which is currently under construction. The 2040 Growth Concept designated this area as a Town Center.
For the City of Hillsboro, with land use jurisdiction north of US 26 at Cornelius Pass Road, and south of US 26 between Shute Road and 185th Avenue, planned land uses include an industrial park.
The City of Beaverton has jurisdiction over some lands south of US 26. Planned land uses include continued retail west of Highway 217 with industrial, office, and retail west of Murray Boulevard.
The Metro 2040 Growth Concept designates a Town Center at the 185th Interchange. This area is expected to include mixed use retail, office, and residential uses. Another Town Center is at the Murray Boulevard Interchange, east of which residential uses are planned.
The 2040 Growth Concept Plan designates downtown Portland as the Central City. It is the regional commercial and cultural hub of the metropolitan area. The plan calls for maintenance and improvements to downtown area highways, including US 26, to provide continued mobility to the city center. The section of US 26 extending from the UGB to 1-405 is in an urbanized area of southwest Portland and eastern Washington County.
B. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT Population and employment growth along the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor will affect the highway's service level and the level of improvements necessary for the state and local transportation systems. Demographic projections indicate that Clatsop, Multnomah, and Washington Counties will experience growth i~,both population and employment during the next 20 years. Tab!es 2-6 and 2-? below illustrate the population and employment growth forecasts through 2012 (Oregon Transportation Plan, 1992). The west side of the Portland Metropolitan region, which includes the US 26 corridor, is expected to experience a high percentage of regional growth through 2010. The total number of employed sons working in the corridor between downtown Portland and Beaverton is expected to grow by approxim 0.3 percent annually. Employment increases in eastern Washington County inside the UGB are expected to be . slightly higher than those in the County overall, as a result of higher development densities within the UGB. Much of the high tech growth in the region has taken place, and continues to take place, in the Sunset Corridor area along US 26. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Table 7 Population Forecasts County 2000 1 2012 / % Change I lgg5* 1995 2012 1I 1I I I - Clatsop 34,300 ( 38,261 1 44,326 1 23 % ~ultnomah 626,500 651,918 71 1,385 12 % Washington 3 13,000 401,982 518,476 40 % Source: Oregon Transportation Plan, ODOT, 1992. * Portland State University, Census and Population Research Center, 1996
Table 8 Employment Forecasts
County 1990 - 2012 Clatsop 13,699 16,270 19,338 Multnomah 375,768 442,177 485,842 Washington 139,131 180,164 263,326
Source: Oregon Transportation Plan, ODOT, 1992. * Portland State University, Census and Population Research Center, 1996.
Because US 26 provides the most direct link to the Oregon coast from the Portland area, population and employment trends projected in Washington County for the next 20 years indicate continuing growth in travel within the County and for US 26.
C. TRANSPORTATION
Intermodd Links US 26 will serve as an intemodal link between port facilities on the lower Columbia, the Oregon Coast, and Portland, and logging and agricultural product movement by trucks. The OTP states that highways accessing intemodal terminals should experience level of service C or better during off-peak periods.
Highway System The Oregon Highway Plan's statewide strategy "sets the preservation of and safety on Oregon's highway system as the number one priority." It seeks to emphasize preservation of existing highway pavement to an overall 90 percent "fair or better" condition. Maintenance and operations work will continue, the bridge program will increase, modernization will plateau at existing levels, and research will be limited.
Volumes Average daily travel volumes are expected to increase by 45% throughout the corridor (refer to Table 9). The greatest projected average annual daily traffic volume (AADTV) increase are in the western segments (6 and 7). These segments consist of four lane highway from the Tillamook Junction to Portland and is projected to increase by 47% (72,400 AADTV). Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Table 9 Forecast - Average Annual Daily TrafJic Volume
Segment 1995 Estimated 2016 Projected Change in Percent Change AADTV AADTV Volume 1995 to 1995 to 2016 2016 Segment 1 5,800 7,200 1,400 24 % Segment 2 5,800 7,500 1,700 29 % Segment 3 5,900 7,800 1,900 32 % Segment 4 6,300 9,700 3,400 54 % Segment 5 7,500 12,000 4,500 60 % Segment 6 22,900 40,000 17,100 75 % Segment 7 134,700 190,000 55,300 41 %
TOTAL 188,900 274,200 85,300 45 %
Source: ODOT
Travel Tiam The Highway Performance Monitoring System Analytical Package (HPMSAP) is a computer software package developed by the Federal Highway Administration to analyze highway data collected in the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) to describe future highway performance. Travel times calculated by the HPMSAP are based on speed limits, congestion levels, development types (rural, community, and/or urban) number of lanes, passing sight distance (rural only), pavement conditions, curves, grades, speed changes and stop cycles, and idling time. The HPMSAP data do not assume land use changes, which would also significantly affect highway performance. The high management option assumes that despite changes in land use, the general operating characteristics of the highway will not change. This might be accomplished through judicious land use planning, local road construction and access management
Average travel times from Cannon Beach to Portland are currently 103 minutes for autos (43 mph) and 131 minutes for tmcks (34 rnpk). These are predicted to degrade to 118 (37 mph) and 143 (31 mph) minutes respectively, based on the continuation of current growth trends and assuming no major improvements or changes in maip-enance and operation practices (refer to Table 10). The no improvement scenario assumes that pavement. :i be maintained, but that neither roadway geometry (width, curvature, grades) nor roadway capacity (number of travel lanes) will be improved.
With improvements including geometric and capacity improvements, the travel times in 2016 for both types of vehicles will decrease to 89 (51 mph) and 120 (37 mph) minutes respectively (refer to Table 10). The 2016 improvements assume a high management option. The high management option assumes that despite changes in land use, the general operating characteristics of the highway will not change. This might be accomplished through judicious land use planning, local road construction, or access management. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor hisring and Future Condirions
Table 10 Forecast - Travel Times of Cars and Trucks
Yeartscenario* Travel Time Average time Statewide Average MinutesITrip MinuteIMile MinutesIMile (carttruck) (carttruck) (carttruck) 1996 1031131 1.3911.77 1.36/1.80 2016 No Improvements 1181143 1.6011.93 1.4711.87 2016 Improvements 891120 1.2111.61 1.2311.66
Source: Overview of Statewide Com'dors, ODOT, 1996.
In 1996, more than half of the route experienced low congestion (determined by level of service experienced), while 17 percent experienced high congestion. If present traffic growth continues without highway improvements, many of the low congestion areas will become more congested. ODOT forecasts that 49 percent of the route will experience high congestion by the year 2016 (See Table 11). This scenario assumes pavement maintenance, but not roadway geometry (width, curvature, grades) nor roadway capacity (number of lanes) improvements.
Table I1 Congestion Forecast
Level of US 26 in 1996 US 26 in 2016 Statewide Average Congestion No Improvements in 2016 No Improvements High 17 % 49 % 17 % Moderate 30 % 31% 21 % Low 53 % 20 % 62 % Source: Overview of Statewide Corridors, ODOT, 1996.
Under the 2016 No Improvement scenario Segments 7 and 5 would experience high congestion levels for the entire length of the segment. Segment 4 would experience high congestion levels for about 10.3 miles or about 46 percent of the segment length. Segment 6 would experience high congestion levels for about 36 percent of the segment. Segments 2 and 3 would also experience high congestion levels. Segment 1 would be moderately congested, a change from the low level of congestion in 1996.
By the year 2016, if there are no improvements in the corridor, the number of accidents per million vehicle miles of travel will increase from 417 accidents per year to 534. Corridor improvements, such as realigning all sharp curves, will still allow the accidents per year to increase to 531 (refer to Table 12). Specific types of improvements necessary to address specific safety problems in the corridor will require further analysis. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Table 12 Forecast - Comparison of Corridor Accidents and Accident Rates
YearIScenario Accidents Accident Rate* Statewide Average (per year) Accident Rate* 1992 417 0.53 0.83 2016, No Improvements 534 0.53 0.83 2016, Improvements** 53 1 0.53 0.75
* Accidents per million vehicle miles of travel. Source : Overview of Statewide Corridors, ODOT, 1996.
The Oregon Highway Plan calls for improving and maintaining pavement surface to fair or better condition. Though most of US 26 has pavement in fair or better condition, there are segments in the rural areas do not meet that standard. The OHP set a target for 90 percent of highways to be at fair or better conditions by 2010.
The Oregon Transportation Plan identifies minimum levels of service needed on highways of statewide importance, especially where the highway provides access to intermodal terminals. US 26 would serve as an intermodal facility for truck traffic, using the planned new intermodal port facilities in Garibaldi and Tillarnook Bay, as well as the Ports of Astoria and Portland. The OTP identifies level of service C or better as the minimum standard.
Other Modes
Air Service Freight service will continue to be a significant part of Portland International Airport's business. The Port of Portland is currently preparing a Master Plan for the Portland-Hillsboro Airport that will identify future expansion plans for this smaller airport. The emphasis of the Port of Portland's development, operations, and marketing is to enhance its established role as :i primary business general aviation facility. Limited scheduled airline service is also a future prospect. However, the many variables involved'make potential activity levels impossible to predict at this time. The need for van or bus shuttle service from communities on the coast to PDX is likely to increase in the future as population increases.
ycle and Pedestrians In some cases, such as the limited access expressway portion of US 26, it may be infeasible or impracticable to provide bikeways and walkways. The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan presents selection criteria to determine if it is appropriate and feasible to provide the bikeways or walkways on parallel facilities (see Section E).
Intercity Transit The future of intercity transit service between the western and eastern ends of the corridor is in doubt. There has historically been a turnover in operators and resulting fluctuations in service. Expected population growth Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
in the urban areas of the corridor will result in growth in traffic levels throughout the corridor, which will then increase recreational traffic for destinations on the north coast. The OTP calls for intercity bus service from Tillamook to Portland.
Public transit service will increase in the eastern end of the corridor as the Westside Light Rail line and associated supporting bus network begin to operate in 1998. This development will have enormous impacts on land use and growth management along the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor.
Service
Freight The Port of Tillamook Bay Railroad has spent $2 million on track and trackbed rehabilitation as of 1995 and has plans to continue rehabilitating the remainder of the line. Sufficient capacity will then accommodate expected growth in rail traffic. The future plans for the railroad are currently under review by the Governor's office. The Port owns a quarry in Tillamook County, and anticipates that it will be in full operation by 1999, when rail will begin hauling the rock inland. The POTB also plans to increase log hauling as the "Tillamook Burn" is harvested over a 30 year period.
Passenger Train Prospects According to the 1993 ODOT Corridor Planning Public Opinion Survey, many trips in the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor are for recreational purposes. The POTB railroad has indicated an interest in providing excursion service in the future if an operator is found and if sufficient demand exists. This would be a long-term opportunity to provide an alternate mode of travel to the coast. An increase in rail passenger service is restricted by necessary track upgrades for the POTB rail lines between Banks and Rockaway Beach. In order for passenger trains to achieve sufficiently high speeds, rail crossings and other improvements will be necessary.
Water Poa There are no water ports within the corridor. However, the highway and rail facilities within the corridor act as linkages to ports at both ends.
In order to make alternative fuel widely available to the transportation user and to support regional economic development, the OTP calls for "adequate" natural gas availability every 100 to 150 miles on major statewide transportation corridors throughout the state. It identifies the need for a new natural gas pipeline in northwestern Oregon as part of the Preferred Transportation System by the year 2012. The pipeline would originate in Tillamook, cross the US 26 corridor in Clatsop County east of Oregon 53 and head south to Portland.
The OTP encourages the use of telecommuting as a demand management technique to reduce vehicle miles traveled in single occupant automobiles, especially during peak hours. The plan identifies a sevenfold increase in the use of telecommunications over 1990 use. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
V. CONCLUSIONS AND KEY FINDINGS
A. THE TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR The Portland - Cannon Beach Junction transportation corridor focuses on US highway 26, but also involves other modes, such as rail, public and intercity transit, bicycle, and links to aviation and water ports. The Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor connects the Portland area with the coast and is a vital link in the region's transportation system, providing access from the Oregon coast to downtown Portland and the rest of the region.
While the majority of land in the corridor is forest or agricultural, and therefore economically reliant on related industries, the corridor also passes through one of the Portland area's fastest growing regions.
B. POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT Population and employment trends projected in the corridor for the next 20 years indicate continued growth. The greatest growth is projected in Washington County. This projected growth would affect the functioning of US 26, because it provides access to the northern portion of the county from the Portland-Vancouver area.
C. LAND USE AND ECONOMY The rural area land uses in Clatsop, Tillamook, Columbia, and Washington Counties will remain unchanged in the future. Statewide planning goals and county comprehensive plans designate forest and farm uses for the rural areas. The major change will be the increase in the level of activity for recreational use and the harvesting of the Tillamook Burn forest. These activities are allowed under the plans, and have the potential to increase traffic on US 26.
The urban areas within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) will experience rapid growth and change. The 1994 Metro 2040 Concept Plan addresses the projected growth and potential land use changes. The Plan emphasizes long-term growth management with the creation of regional and town centers and increased density. US 26 would be managed as a through-route in the plan.
Metro and the City of Hillsboro have designated a large area of the land around US 26 as industrial. This designation of land on US 26 creates a need for the corridor to function as a commuter link and a freight route to move goods and services to the regional transportation hubs.
a D. TRANSPORTATION
Intermodal Links The corridor's primary intermodal connections are in the urban areas, providing important links to transfer points. The new Westside Light Rail project and the Sunset Transit Center will greatly increase opportunities for intermodal connections for travelers.
Freight intermodal connections of truck-to-rail or port facilities to transfer goods from landside to ship freight exist at either end of the corridor in Portland and Tillamook. Within the rural section of the corridor intermodal facilities do not exist, due to the sparse population and the overall low levels of freight movement. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Highway System
Volumes The projected average annual daily traffic volume indicates segment 4, 5, 6, and 7 will experience significant increases.
Travel Th While highway improvements and maintenance may cancel out time lost to increasing volumes, the Portland- Cannon Beach Junction corridor remains the quickest route to the coast from Portland of the three statewide routes.
Congestion generally follows the increase in projected traffic volumes in the corridor. The 2016 geometric improvement scenario would eliminate high congestion levels in segments 2 and 3 and reduce it in segment 4. This scenario would not reduce high congestion levels in segments 5, 6, and 7. Under the scenario of capacity and geometric improvements all segments except 7 would experience low congestion levels.
Safetv Safety data from 1995 indicates that in segments 1, 2, and 3, accident rates per million vehicle miles of highway traveled exceeds the statewide rural accident rate. The 1995 Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) listed three fatal sites on US 26, while top ten percent SPIS sites were located on US 26 in Segment One and at the junction with 1-405.
US 26 generally has good pavement conditions and an operating level of service of C or D. Though the highway is in generally good condition, there are areas where roadway safety are of concern and may require maintenance and expansion. These areas are in segments 2, 3, and 4 in the higher terrain and have more severe weather conditions.
There will be an increase in future truck traffic as the forest area known as the "Tillamook Burn" comes on line for harvesting. Some of this traffic will travel to intermodal port facilities on the coast as well as in Portland.
Other Transportation Modes
Primary air service for the corridor is from the Portland International Airport and the Portland-Hillsboro Airport (in the corridor), both of which have intermodal connections. Additional small and private airports are located within the corridor. Expansion of the Portland-Hillsboro Airport may facilitate freight transportation for companies within the corridor. Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Existing and Future Conditions
Pedestrian and Bicycle Pedestrian and bicycle transportation in the corridor is limited, but should improve with highway projects, many of which will include widening road shoulders. The Sunset Transit Center will encourage pedestrian and bicycle connections to light rail for commuters.
city Trm There is currently no intercity public transit service serving the length of the corridor. Public transit service is concentrated in the Portland metropolitan region, which is served by Tri-Met.
There are currently no intermodal freight facilities in the corridor. Freight rail service on the Port of Tillamook Bay railroad will increase in the future to transport logging, aggregate resources, and cattle feed. The POTB railroad has little existing intermodal interaction, as it hauls specific material from point to point between Tillamook Bay and Hillsboro. Additional upgrading would be required for passenger service. xI!&L&m There are no ports within the corridor. There are ports at the western end of the corridor and in Portland, which are connected to points within the corridor by train and highway. . . Oil and Gas P ~~elines- There are currently natural gas pipelines within the corridor at many points, but the OTP calls for a new pipeline between Tillamook and Portland by 2012.
Telecommunications Due to the large number of high technology firms locating in the vicinity of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction corridor, it has strong potential for telecommuting activity. The OTP calls for a sevenfold increase in such activity as a means of decreasing vehicle miles traveled over time. Chapter 3
CORRIDOR ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, AND CONSTRAINTS Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
I. INTRODUCTION
Chapter Three considers the Issues, Opportunities, Constraints, and Preliminary Objectives of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan. This inventory is meant to be a working document, identrfving transportation needs in the corridor.
These ideas emerged from numerous sources during a year-long process. ODOT presented information from Chapter Two to local public interest groups, in local and statewide stakeholders interviews, at open houses, and in newsletters. Interested parties then provided additional inputs, which are presented here as stated by the different groups.
In a series of meetings, the Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG) then developed Preliminary Objectives based on this community input, which led to the Transportation System Objectives presented in Chapter Four. (See the Appendix regarding Preliminary Objectives that were altered or dropped.) The CTAG represents 21 local, county, regonal, and state jurisdictions along the corridor, charged with developing realistic, corridor-wide transportation objectives. A large part of the CTAG's work involved addressing the tradeoffs that must be made for this corridor to function as a statewide transportation corridor.
A. ORGANIZATION Plan objectives will be tied to performance measures to make them more meaningful. Chapter Three is organized to address transportation performance and projected corridor impacts, by separating ideas into transportation performance categories:
Transportation Balance: The overall level of service provided by the various modes of transportation in the corridor. Part of this is an emphasis on reducing single occupancy vehicle use through expansion of service by other modes and/or demand management. Regional Connectzvzty: Available transportation services m.d travel times indicate the level of regonal connection. Highway Congestion: The highway's level of service is indicated by the proportion of the corridor experiencing restricted traffic flow and delays. Road Condihons: Adequacy of the roadway to meet the Oregon Transportui,on Plan gods for accessibility, levels of service, and reduced congestion. Highzua y Safef7j: The potential for reductions in the number or severity of accidents.
Potential projected impacts in the corridor include:
Land Use and Community Impacts: Effects of the corridor on community livability and the potential to adversely affect sigruficant community resources such as historic properties and parks. Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Colzstraints
Environmental and Elzergy Impacts: The potential to adversely affect natural resources such as wetlands and sensitive habitats, and potential changes in energy consumed for transportation Economic Impacts: The likely effects of transportation performance improvements on transportation costs and the local economies.
B. ASSUMPTIONS During the planning process, assumptions have been made about the corridor's role and function. The Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor serves both urban and rural transportation needs. Although it is a multi-modal corridor, it is dominated by auto use on US Highway 26. US 26, part of the National Highway System, is one of two major tourist routes to the north coast, and is the primary access from the Portland area to the Tillaxnook area via OR Highway 6.
Within its urban portion (within the Portland metropolitan urban growth boundary), use of all transportation modes is increasing. In this eastern portion, the Corridor has the following primary functions: Both an inter-city and intra-city commuter route. Major regional transit corridor, focused on the Westside light rail system. Access to major employment centers, including a growing high-tech industnj. Majorfreight movement within the urban growth bounhnj.
Within its rural portion (outside the Metro urban growth boundary), the Corridor is noted for the following functions: Access to recreational, tourist, and scenic resources. Natural resource amenities, particularly agricultural and forest lands and scenic rivers. Connection to rural communities such as Vemonia. Truckfreight movement for agriculture.
Assumptions also include existing construction projects in the corridor and projects under development or study by a public agency. The recommendations or conclusions of these projects will be incorporated into the corridor plan. Current highway construction projects include work in the urban area of the corridor to accommodate the Westside light rail extension and the recently improved interchange at the Portland Zoo, and a pavement overlay project is underway on US 26 from Storey Creek to 185th Avenue. Planned highway projects include the widening of US 26 to six ' lanes westward to Murray Boulevard and new interchanges at Sylvan, Canyon, and Camelot Roads.
11. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ISSUES, CONSTRAINTS, AND OPPORTUNITIES
A. TRANSPORTATION BALANCE The Oregon Transportation Plan states that a balanced transportation system is one that provides transportation options at appropriate minimum service standards, reduces reliance on the single occupant automobile where other modes or choices can be made available, particularly in urban
3-2 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints areas, and takes advantage of the inherent efficiencies of each mode. What follows is an evaluation of the modal balance within the US 26 corridor based on Chapter 2, Existing and Future Conditions.
Air Service
Lack of commuter air service within corridor Increasing demand for air freight services by high-tech companies in the corridor Auport access from west end of corridor Difficult transit connections to PDX Lack of connecting shuttle service from PDX to suburban/rural locations in the corridor Land use encroachments adjacent to airports Capability of general aviation airports to provide regular air service
Greater regonal role for Hillsboro Anport providing commuter and freight service and corporate aircraft, particularly for high tech industries Future service at Vemonia, Tillamook, Cornelius, Seaside, and Nehalem * Connections via transit and other modes to Portland Axport * Improved interrnodal connections via light rail
Cons- Low demand for additional services Lack of public transit from suburban areas and west end of corridor to Portland Anport Distance to airports from west end of corridor Limitations on expansion of Hillsboro Airport Policy that Hillsboro wortwill not compete with Portland Airport for major carriers Statutory limitations on airport expansions on resource lands Lack of intermodal connections at rural airports Short mways at Hikboro Airport, limiting the type of planes that ran lmd here Prohibitive cost of air freight service between HiUsboro and PBX Inadequate facilities at general aviation airports to provide additional air services
Bicycles
Issues Accommodating increasing bicycle use in the corridor Lack of north/south bicycle connections wihthe urban portion Lack of continuous bikeways Provision, maintenance and safety of bike lanes and bike facilities Inadequate width of existing shoulders along some sections of US 26 Lack of dedicated bicycle lanes/separated bicycle-pedestrian trails Conflicts with auto/ truck/ RV/ farm vehicle traffic Alternative routes to avoid conflicts with other modes Differing needs between recreational and commuter biking Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Cons tra~i?ts
Accommodating bicycles in the design of urban area interchanges Accommodating bicycles on rural transit lines, on rail
Westside Light rail and associated US 26 improvements will provide for bicycle safety and accessibility from downtown Portland to Highway 217 Bike path from Rock Creek Park to Qumtana LRT station Improved connectivity to local bike systems Link bicycle routes with van service, e.g. "flag stops" along the corridor Accommodating bicycles on rural transit lines (if developed) and on rail Adding/improving bicycle lanes or widening shoulders as part of planned highway projects Alternative routes to avoid conflicts with other modes
Conflicts with auto/ truck/RV/ farm vehicle traffic Lack of bikeways and supportive facilities throughout most of the corridor Narrow road shoulders Topographic constraints to expanded shoulders or separate bikeways Lack of services, e.g. camping opportunities, for cyclists US 26 as a north/ south barrier Conflicts with traffic at urban intersections Prohibition on bicycles in the Vista Tunnel Topographical and facility constraints from downtown Portland over the West Hills to US 26 Lack of signal to facilitate safe passage through Sunset Tunnel
Pedestrians
e Lack of north /south pedestrian connections e Difficulty in pedestrians crossing the highway in both urban and rural co protected pedestrian crossings) Lack of trail connections/ loops among corridor communities Lack of pedestrian connections at east end of corridor, e.g. to 1-405 and downtown
Trail connections/loops among corridor communities Pedestrian overcrossing of US 26 just west of Highway 217, with access to Sunset Transit Center and light rail Railbanking for trails, e.g. extension of Banks-Vernonia trail Safer pedestrian crossings in rural communities along US 26 Constraints Physical limitations, e.g. lack of right-of-way, built or natural obstructions Confhcts with auto and truck traffic Lack of pedestrian crossings across US 26 3 -4 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Cons train ts
Rural development densities that don't support pedestrian fachties
Public and Intercity Transit
Issues Developinent of additional transit centers OTP calls for transit service from Tillamook to Portland by 2012 More accessible and convenient service Need for additional park and rides Comfort in transit services, e.g. covered waiting areas Transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged (i.e., seniors, handicapped) Lack of transit services in the rural portion of the corridor Continuation/ expansion of service between Cannon Beach/Seaside and Portland
Use of light rail in the urban portion of the corridor and other transit to accommodate additional trips within the corridor's urban portion Opportunities to provide connecting service to transit centers in some areas Transit/HOV bypass lanes on entrance ramps Mini-bus/van service from Portland to coast Potential service (e.g. park and rides) at Jackson School Road, Manning, Highway 47 Junction, and other appropriate locations Axport shuttle service from the rural areas of the corridor Expansion of "Bikes on Buses" program within the corridor Connections to rail services Carpooling/vanpooling to transit centers and large employment centers Expanded service in Cannon Beach and Seaside Senior transit services in Clatsop County and/or Seaside and Cannon Beach
Tri-Met service boundary Lack of connecting service to transit centers In some areas Lack of light rail along US 26 west of Highway 217 junction Inadequate right-of-way for transit/HOV bypass lanes on enbance rarnps Difficulty changing behavior Security at park and rides Distance to, convenience, regularity of transit service Absence of rural transit services and connections to other modes Rural pattern of development results in a low demand for service Lack of interconnected road network Rail Service
Issues Long-term role of rail in the corridor Freight movement between the Metro area and the north coast 3-5 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Co~zstra~ilts
Interconnection of rail with other modes Effects of railroad crossing closures on lumber, dairy and other economic opportunities
Passenger rail to coast on weekends/other excursion/ tourism uses Use of r'ail for high-tech shipping With abandonment of BN line, removal of trestle over Highway 26 Sigruficant available capacity and mfrastructure Upgrading railroad crossings in conjunction with other roadway improvements Target industrial recruitment on rail shippers Railbanking Use of Port of Tillamook Bay line for lumber and aggregate transport
Low demand for passenger service within the corridor; inadequate intermodal passenger facilities (What do you do once you get there? - coastal communities) Existing trackbed and crossings would need to be improved for additional service Rail versus truck freight shipping rates Lack of intermodal facilities Facilities, type of products preclude choices of rail or truck transport Speed differential between truck and rail rates Ability of POTB to invest in line upgrades Private ownhrship of some rail lines/facilities Narrow trestle across US 26 north of Highway 47
Water Transport/Ports
Issues * Intennodal connections a Accessibility to ports for corridor freight
a Truck freight links to ports at the west and east ends of the corridor Development of intermodal facilities at POTB
Timing of port improvements. Distance to Portland area markets from coastal ports
Pipelines
Issues Meeting the need for a new pipeline by 2012 3-6 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Effects of new lines/extensions of existing lines on other transportation modes and facilities Accommodating pipelines in highway rights-of-way Danger of exposed pipelines at Mist gas wellheads
Truck freight links to ports at the west and east ends of the corridor Development of intermodal facilities at POTB
Timing of port improvements Distance to Portland area markets from coastal ports
Telecommunications
Issues Increasing opportunities for telecommuting Use of US 26 as right-of-way for fiber optic and other telecommunication equipment Continuity of communications infrastructure e Siting of cellular antennas
Promotion of telecommuting by high-tech companies and other employers within the corridor Use of existing microwave/cell site facilities
Cons- * Siting cellular antennas Lack of employers' support of telecommuting Additional. costs for rural. connections "Dead spots" for cellular phone communications, e.g. Sunset Rest Area
Automobile
Issues Conflicts between growth in traffic volumes and TPR requirements Relationship between planned/potential highway improvements and increases in per capita VMT Use of parallel routes to decrease reliance on state highways for intra-city trips Increased traffic associated with major employment growth in Hillsboro area Concentration of traffic from the development of Town Centers at the intersections with US 26 of Highway 217, Murray Boulevard and 185th Avenue Urban section capacity and safety improvements - Interchanges Braided ramp to access Cedar Hills Boulevard - Widening Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunit~es,Coizstrnlnts
1-405 to Glencoe Road - Local access, e.g. frontage roads Bronson Road NW Rock Creek Boulevard Cornelius Pass Road A new ramp to US 26 between Cornelius Pass and Evergreen Scattered development in rural areas Rural section capacity and safety improvements - Interchanges Jackson School Road Glencoe Road Gordon Road Dersham Road Vernonia Road - Widening Four lanes from Quartz Creek Bridge to four-lane section just east of Saddle Mountain - Passing lanes and other safety improvements Cannon Beach Junction to Necanicum (Highway 53) Junction Lindsley Creek-West Humbug Creek passing lane - Climbing lanes West of Camp 18 - Turning lanes, access management Manning area/Nehalem Highway (OR 47) junctions (north and south) Timber Road junction Camp 18 (longer turning lanes) Jewell Junction At Sitka Spruce viewing site Necanicum (OR 53) Junction
Reduced percentage of auto trips through TDM measures, e.g. transit and carpooling * Congestion pricing, mile-based and or emission-based registration fees, other TDM strateges Increased transit use with Westside light rail construction r Trip reduction through transit-related development planned for LRT stations Use of parallel routes to decrease reliance on state highways for fntra-city trips Underutilized interchange at Dersham Road North-south overpasses of US 26 to relieve local congestion at freeway interchanges
Difficulty chanpg behavior patterns Lack of alternative travel options Lack of alternative access to recreational opportunities Length of corridor for trips to either end Constrained passage through Portland West Hills, e.g. Vista Ridge Tunnel Inadequacy of existing parallel routes in urban areas Restrictions on transportation improvements on rural lands Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Dispersed services in rural portions of corridor Separation of work places, residences and services, especially in rural and suburban areas
Truck Freight
Issues Increased log truck use of US 26 when the Tillarnook burn comes on line Increased truck freight from Hillsboro to Portland due to high tech development Air freight connections to Portland Arport Delays in freight delivery due to highway congestion Increased transport of hazardous materials Conflicts with autos and other modes Need for additional climbing lanes in western portion of corridor Improved connections to other corridors, e.g. US 30, US 101,I-405 Truck access to North Plains industrial lands
Construction of additional climbing/passing lanes Design to separate truck traffic, e.g. truck-only lanes Use of North Plains/Glencoe Road as a major route for agricultural products
Congestion in urban portion of corridor Physical constraints, e.g. hilly areas, constricted right-of-way Prohibition on the transport of hazardous materials through the Vista Ridge Tunnel PDX air cargo schedules that may limit transport times from high tech industries to Portland
B. MIGHW'AY CONGESTION
Facility Management
a Appropriate access management standards and facility management techniques Development of local or frontage roads Multiple accesses in rural development sections Closure of Barnes Road westbound on-ramp Difficulty in crossing US 26 during congested periods New access points to state and private timber lands for management, fire protection, harvesting and recreation.
Consolidating accesses in rural centers Local/frontage roads at Harrison Road, Lodge/Sellers Roads and Jewell-Mist/Highway 103 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Coi~stnz~~~ts
Left turn lanes/ refuges Use of local access management and circulation plans to relieve congestion problems Improvements to road network in urban areas to accommodate potential residential growth Considerable capacity on some interchanges, such as Dersham Road overpass
Tourism-related access roads Resource land/environmental impacts associated with new local/frontage roads Current policy is to consolidate accesses only with redevelopment. However, multiple accesses in rural areas are a safety concern now Seasonal traffic demands Physical htations to additional access in some sections
Congestion in Urbanized Areas
Issues * Reducing peak-hour congestion * Heavy congestion at 1-405, OR 8/Canyon Rd., and OR 217 interchanges * Congestion on parallel routes in the urban area, e.g. Evergreen, Cornellzind Cornelius Pass Roads, Tualatin Valley Highway Increasing use of local streets to bypass congested arterials a Acceptability of lower levels of service in special transportation districts such as TOD's/Town Centers Effects on emergency services
Use of TDM strateges by larger (50+ employees) employers Increased public transit providing greater capacity and options in the Portland metro area Arterial signal optimization programs Continuation/ expansion of ramp metering, incident management, motorist information system, and video surveillance Widening of US 26 to six lanes from Portland to Shute Road Ramp at Evergreen/Cornelius Pass Road to US 26 Weather stations at key locations and improved information systems; improved maintenance crew response Use of transit and carpools/vanpools to reduce commuter volumes and congestion Use of parallel routes to decrease reliance on state highways for intra-city trips Constraints Physical constraints against further widening of US 26 between 1-405 and Highway 217 Lack of convenient alternate routes in Portland metro area for commuters and visitors to major recreational facilities Increasing congestion on surface arterials and at US 26 interchanges Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Congestion in Rural Areas
Issues Appropriate LOSS in rural areas Multiple accesses Heavy congestion at some access points, e.g. Jackson School Road, Highway 47, Glencoe Road, Seller Road intersections Congestion at some rural access points, e.g. Camp 18, Manning, Timber Road/Vemonia intersection Congestion at Cannon Beach Junction to Seaside
Turn lanes and passing lanes at congestion points Continuation/expansion of ramp metering, e.g. Jackson School Road Interchange and/ or overpass at Jackson School Road
Constraints Capacity constrictions at OR 47 junctions and at Sunset Tunnel near Scofield Physical limitations, aesthetic impacts of highway widening
C. REGIONAL CONNECTJYITY Reg-lonal connectivity addresses how well different parts of the state are connected, as reflected by the transportation services available and travel times between these places. Connectivity includes connections among modes and between places, and cooperative transportation roles among corridor communities.
Modal Connections
Issues * US 26 and Portland Airport connections Intermodal connections at the Portland-Hillsboro Anport * Transit services from coast to Portland Axport Bicycle services linking the coast to other portions of the corridor
Potential for increased park and ride lots if transit service becomes available for the western end of the corridor Park and ride lots; bike racks at transit stations Expanded rail freight service Commercial air service Expansion of shuttle service between PDX and transit stations Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Coi~straznts
Constraints Upgrading required for rail passenger service Lack of transit service to airports Lack of intermodal facihties Lack of demand/ seasonal demand for transit services in western portion of corridor
Connectivity Between Places: Appropriate Travel Times
Issues Maintaining current travel times Conflicts between local and through traffic Role of facility management, e.g. ramp meters, in achieving appropriate travel times Lack of north-south connections across US 26 Difficulty in crossing US 26 at congested periods, e.g. Jackson School Road Need for additional access points to US 26, e.g. Sellers Road, Cornelius Pass Road/Evergreen Difficulty in accessing US 26 at congested periods, e.g. Nehalem Highway (at both Banks and Vernonia turnoffs) and Timber Rd. junctions Climbing/ passing lanes in western portion of corridor Widening of Helvetia Road/Shute Road interchange
* Access management on the rural portions of US 26 and on urban local parallel routes within the periphery of interchanges. Non-interchange overcrossings in the urban areas to relieve pressure at interchanges for north- south travel Ability of existing overpasses such as Helvetia Road/Shute Road to accommodate six lanes if highway widening occurs Projects underway or planned to add passing lanes * Reconstmct/widening of Wolf Creek Bridge in western portion of corridor s Bypass from Highway 219 (Hillsboro)to Cornelius Pass Road and US 30 Bypass north from HiUsboro over the Columbia River to 1-5 at Woodland
e Physical limitations of capacity- expansions md geometric improvements Lack of alternative routes Need to remove abandoned railroad overpass at Cornelius Pass Road in order to widen highway Narrow railroad bridge overpass at mile post 43/Scofield Road
Interconnected, Cooperative Transportation Roles Among Corridor Communities
Issues Balancing local transportation needs with the functioning of the corridor as a state highway Use of US 26 as local street in certain rural setions Lack of or inadequate alternate routes in some portions of the corridor 3-12 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Improvements to I-405/US 26 connections Improvements to Highway 202 as a secondary route between Astoria and US 26 Improvements to Highway 53 as a route to mid-Coast Lack of US 26-US 30 connection North/ south bypass from Cannon Beach Junction to Astoria area
Improvements to the US 26/I-405, US 26/217 interchanges Overpasses to facilitate local multi-modal travel Improved/expanded signage to inform travelers of route choices available
Constraints Lack of alternative routes Lack of north/south connections Costs and impacts of building bypasses or other major new facilities
D. ROAD CONDITIONS
Roadway Geometry Roadway geometry addresses the physical configuration of the highway. It includes lane widths, curvature and the alignment of the roadway. Issues Improved stopping sight distances and approach road angles Entering US 26 from Highway 53 Shute/ Helvetia and Glencoe interchanges Long curve up to US 26/US 101junction Slide-prone areas in Sylvan Canyon 0sweg Slide area Steep grade/ice problems, narrow shoulders (gullies on both sides of highway) in Quartz Creek area Dip/slide area near East Humbug Creek Design of Nehalem River Highway intersections (nor& and south) At-grade crossing at Jackson School Road Design of cloverleaf at Cannon Beach Junction Inadequate shoulders on Quartz Creek Bridge Poor visibiiity Upgrade substandard guard rails and shoulders, and pavement grades
Planned projects at Lindsley Creek and Humbug Creek to provide additional lanes Preservation of the roadway by investing in roadbed and pavement reconstruction as needed to minimize maintenance costs Widening at off-ramp to OR B/Canyon Road to improve the opportunity for lane change on approach Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constra~llts
Improvement of all sunken grade sections Improved signing for Jewell Junction Realignment and other improvements to intersections with limited sight distances Iden*/ address drainage problems Identxfyladdress roadside obstacles and sign hazards
Environmental limitations, e.g. US 26/US 101 interchange Narrow shoulders/buildings close to highway, e.g. Elsie
Surface Conditions Surface conditions address the condition of the highway pavement, including pavement and maintenance. Issues Weather conditions in higher elevations result in stress on highway pavement Sunken grades, especially through Coast Range Pavement deterioration west of Camp 18 0 Maintenance/upgrading of bridges and tunnels e Poor visibility of striping and jersey barriers in poor weather conditions . . DOrhlIlw Maintenance of existing facilities as the highest priority for the allocation of state resources Use of pavement overlay materials, e.g. open graded asphalt, that reduces rnist/ice Button reflectors Constraints e Paving in poor condition in West Humbug Creek area e Part of highway is located within Necanicmn River floodway
. E. HIGHWAY SAFETY
High Accident Locations
Issues Effects of congestion on emergency services Direct access from St. Vincent Medical Center to US 26 for emergency vehicles At-grade crossings at Sell Road, Roy/Mountaindale Road, and Jackson School Road School bus safety in crossing US 26 Inability to slow traffic with yellow caution lights, e.g. Sellers Road Inability of stop signs to control traffic at Jackson School Road section Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Comdor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Railroad tracks paralleling the highway in the Manning area cause backups onto the highway (Manning area bv the Grange Hall.) Winter driving cbnditions, icy areas, e.g., Quartz Creek Bridge Need for additional safety rest facilities and emergency assistance callboxes Multiple accesses onto US 26 in some rural sections Lack of turn lanes on US 26 in some rural sections, e.g., Timber Road, Manning, and Nehalem Highway Inadequate length of slow-moving vehicle turnouts Exit route improvements to accommodate earthquake/ tsunami events Design of US 26/Highway 47 intersections (north and south) Expansion of facilities at Sunset Rest Area; need for additional rest areas Uncontrolled wildfires as a hazard to motorists Inadequate warning for the Jewell-Mist junction
Targeting realignment and other improvements outside the Metro UGB to sections with above- average accident rates Ramp metering at US 26 intersections, e.g. Jackson School Road Overpass at Jackson School Road with on and off ramps Lengthen slow-moving vehicle turnouts Additional crosswalks in rural areas (e.g. Camp 18, Elsie, Timber Road Junction) Facility management techniques (including access management) Current projects to address high accident locations Guard rails and rallroad track crossing protection where needed to meet highway safety standards Safety barriers Weather condition monitoring devices at strategic locations Increased video surveillance at high accident locations Upgraded/improved signage to provide motorists advance warning of lane changes required for exiting Rapid access to forest lands for fire protection and control
Capacity expansions, i.e., additional lanes, make crossing US 26 more dangerous Winter driving conditions in the Coast Range Steep grades that cause unsafe truck speeds in Coast Range Shade for forest canopy creates ice bdd-up The danger to pedestrians of unsignahzed crosswalks in high speed areas Narrow railroad bridge overpass at nule post 43/Scofield Road Sigruficant vandalism of rest area fachties Inconsistency between state and local government accident systems or the lack of local systems.
Hazardous Material Transport
Issues Need for consistent alternate route(s) for hazardous materials transport Traffic enforcement related to the transport of hazardous materials Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunzties, Coilstraints
Additional transport of hazardous wastes on US 26 when other routes, e.g. US 30, are closed
Use of OR 217 and Cornelius Pass Road as hazardous waste transport route detours Modifications, if needed, to current hazardous materials response program Improvements to unsafe road sections
Tunnels restrict the options for hazardous waste transport High-density residential development in eastern portion Lack of alternate routes in western portion
Need for Additional Traffic Enforcement
Issues Lack of enforcement, particularly on weekends Emergency service responses by volunteer fire departments is increasing due to limited police presence e Enforcement of slow-moving vehicle use of turnouts o Enforcement of truck speed limits and lane use regulations
Automated signage in the rural portions of the corridor to inform motorists of delays from congestion or accidents, inclement weather, forest fires, or rock falls. Cooperative enforcement among police and sheriff offices Targeting enforcement activities to high-accident locations Signage and warning systems
e Limited personnel e Length of corridor
F. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY IMPACTS
Scenic Resources Impacts to views to and from the highway corridor must be considered with any proposed improvements. Issues Additional protection beyond that currently provided for sensitive scenic areas Maintenance of tree canopy Blowdown in areas of minimal buffers Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Additional scenic turnouts Screening of ODOT maintenance/storage areas Confl~ctsbetween safety and other improvements and scenic resources
Designation of the corridor as a scenic corridor in state plans Plantings of native vegetation/vegetation management to provide scenic vistas Improved sigrung of existing attractions Additional roadside turnoffs at scenic viewpoints Removal of scenic intrusions such as billboards and provision of scenic buffers for timber harvests Iden* priority scenic resources and develop protection measures in local plans Expand Sunset Highway Forest Wayside to include all State Forest sections of the highway Utilize vegetation management measures to create and protect scenic vistas and to replace or mitigate for vegetation lost in transportation projects Scenic viewpoints/ signage for Necanicum River Use of scenic buffers to reduce erosion, slides Constraints Capacity constraints of Sunset Highway Wayside to accommodate signhcant visitation. Lack of protective measures in local plans Need for vegetation trimming may limit the width of scenic buffers
Natural Resources
Issues Identification/ avoidance of impacts to sensitive habitats Impacts to migration routes for big game Protection or avoidance of wetland impacts for projects such as highway widenings and bridges
* Protection through the Sunset Highway Forest Wayside of some western portions of the corridor Idenwing and avoiding impacts to the most sensitive areas @ Using bransportation improvement projects to rectify negative impacts , Providing adequate signage for big game viewing areas Construction of elevated highway (bridges)versus fills
Constraints Unavoidable impacts resulting from maintenance and needed improvements Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunztzcs, Constraints
Air Quality
Issues Promotion of alternative modes to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita within the Portland airshed Maintaining compliance with federal and state air quality standards with increase population growth and resultant congestion and increased VMT
New projects are required to consider air quality impacts Multi-modal solutions to traffic problems become more feasible with air quality protection requirements DEQ initiatives, e.g. parking maximums, to reduce non-residential surface parking within the regional UGB. Constraints * VMT increases due to population growth * Difficulty in chanpg driver behavior e Recreation nature of trips makes alternative modes unattractive e Feasibility of alternative modes in rural portions of the corridor
Water QualityIQuantity
Issues Water quality problems created by existing facilities Sand from maintenance activities being swept into creeks * Multipie river crossings * Increased run-off with additional impervious surfaces * Siltation from hghway improvements and construction practices Accidental spills with hazardous waste transport
Design of roadway improvements and new facilities to minimize surface runoff Water quality facilities Constraints Constraints to the design of highway improvements due to the proximity to waterways Maintenance activities needed for safety "Soft" soils whch necessitate culverting Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Comdor Issues, Opportunities, Constraints
Energy Conservation
Providing alternate, energy efficient modes for traveling the entire corridor Transit service in the western end of the corridor
Reducing fuel consumption by reducing congestion Alternate, more energy-efficient mode of travel available with Westside light rail and supporting bus system and park and ride stations Resumption of transit service between Portland and Coast More energy-efficient freight movement by rail Better system management through implementation of advanced traffic management systems (ATMS) New technologies Extend subsidized transit service to rural segments of the corridor and to the coast
0 Low demd/high cost for transit services in western portion of the corridor
(Note: Energy consumption would be reduced by many of the proposed objectives in this document, particularly those related to promoting increased use of alternative transportation modes.)
G. COMMUNITY AND LAND USE IMPACTS
Land Use Impacts
Continued residential, commercial and industrial development - Planned Town Centers at three urban interchanges - Highways 217/26, Murray Boulevard, 185th Avenue - Development proposed at US 26iCornelivs Pass Road interchange - Growth in the Banks area - Large growth in employment in northeast Wboro Increased traffic resulting from growth within the Metro UGB, any UGB expansions and rural development Residential development east of Cannon Beach Transportation-efficientland use patterns that reduce VMT and promote a live/work balance Effects of factory mall outlets and other strip development in Seaside on functioning of Highway 101/Highway 26 area Lack of adequate/ consistent standards for buildmg setbacks from highway and local arterial rights- of-way "Green Corridor" between UGB and North Plains North Plains UGB expansion Effects of land use development on highway facilities, e.g. slides Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunities, Constrnints
Increased commercial development at the corridor's west end
Region 2040 planning and other efforts to foster transportation-efficient land use patterns that reduce vehicle miles traveled and promote a live/work balance, e.g. clustered development, mixed uses, maximum parking ratios, and circulation systems that reduce out-of-direction travel. Alternative local transportation routes Access management to limit the impacts of new development on highway congestion Multi-modal capabilities/capacities of the corridor to promote development that is not solely auto/truck-dependent Multi-modal strateges that reduce auto dependence
Constraints Growth rates exceeding projected increases
Effects on Community Livability
Sensitivity to community facilities during project planning o Proximity of small communities to the highway Impacts to 4(f) resources (parks) during project construction Effects of highway and airport noise on adjoining and nearby properties Coordination with Native American Tribes and other groups
Coordination with the Oregon Dept. of Parks and Recreation Heritage Assessment and State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) Coordination with the Goal 5 Assessments of Open Space and Scenic Views and Goal 8 Recreation Needs Plans 0 Design transportation improvements to minimize impacts to existing cemeteries, parks and other community resources Maintain spring-fed water foun 0 Relocation of Joseph L. Meek historic marker off of US 26 to Jackson School Road
Location of communities on both sides of the highway Location of cemeteries adjacent to the highway Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Isstles, Opportunities, Constraznfs
H. ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Economic Development
Jssues Role of the corridor in supporting/ promoting economic development Improvements to US 26 to maintain accessibility Highway design to facilitate freight movement
Transportation improvements that encourage economic development Tourism incentives Multi-modal transportation services Prioritization of projects that enhance development of existing industrial and commercial sites
Highway congestion Conflicts among modes
Recreation Opportunities
Issues Role of corridor in promoting/ supporting recreation uses Safe and adequate access to recreation facilities Adequate signing for recreation sites Impacts to 4(f) resources (i.e., parks, historic sites) Additi~ndrest stops Highway maintenance to ensure convenient/ comfortable recreation travel Providing public access to forest lands Recreation planning and interpretive programs
Convenient access to a variety of recreational opportunities Recreational air services at North Plains and Cornelius au-ports Connections to recreational triuls Improvements to sigrung Recreational facilities/rest stops in eastern portion of corridor ODOF recreation plan for Tillamook State Forest Re-establishment of interpretive display at Sunset Rest Area Interpretive opportunities at view areas and rest areas, e.g. for Military Road near Sunset Rest Area and at US 26/Timber Road Junction Interpretive trail near Sunset Rest Area Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues, Opportunittes, Constraints
Constraints Adequate funds for maintenance Lack of convenient alternative modes to access recreational features Chapter 4
INTERIM CORRIDOR STRATEGY Appendix 1
ISSUES MATRIX Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draji 11/26/96
- .= $ b zf,s 22L 2>%& 2 QT- -e e -0 Chapter 3 Corridor Issues TU2.W Comments I
A. TRANSPORTATION BALANCE
1 Air Service Lack of commuter air service within corridor X Objective A4 and A5 Increasing demand for air freight services by high-tech companies in the X Objective A3 corridor Airport access from west end of corridor x Objective A4 and A5 Difficult transit connections to Portland Airport x Objective A4 Lack of connecting shuttle service from PDX to suburban/rural locations X Objective A5 in the corridor Land use encroachments adjacent to airports X Objectives A1 and A2 Capability of general aviation airports to provide regular air service X Objective A6
2 Bicycles Accommodating increasing bicycle use in the corridor X Objectives A7 and A12 Lack of northfsouth bicycle connections within the urban portion x Objectives A14 Lack of continuous bikeways x Objectives A10 and A1 1 Provision, maintenance and safety of bike lanes and bike facilities X Objective A12 Inadequate width of existing shoulders along some sections of US 26 x Objective A10 Dedicated bicycle lanesfseparated bicycle-pedestrian trails x Objective A8 and A13 Conflicts with autoftruckiRVffarm vehicle traffic x Objectives A10, All, A8 and A13 Alternative routes to avoid conflicts with other modes X Objective A13 Differing needs between recreational and commuter biking x Objectives A7, A16 and A20 Accommodating bicycles in the design of urban area interchanges X Objective A7 Accommodating bicycles on rural transit lines and on rail X Objective A17
3 Pedestrians Lack of northfsouth pedestrian connections Objective A22 Difficulty in pedestrians crossing the highway in both urban and rural x Objective A24 and A26 communities (lack of protected pedestrian crossings) Lack of trail connections/loops among corridor communities X Objective A23 Lack of pedestrian connections at east end of corridor, e.g. to 1-405 and X The US 26 Corridor is a limited access downtown facility as it joins 1-45. City of Portland streets provide pedesmmanconnections in the downtown area.
Ne: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 1 sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draft 11/26/96
"e .s 2 b pw 2%i 2 5% 3 2q-C- "e Ct rD Chapter 3 Corridor Issues * Q Comments TD2.1.. I
4 Public Transit Development of additional transit centers X Within the com'dor the need is for increased accessibility to transit and connection of modes; therefore objectives are directed at increase transit service in the corridor and establishing support services and service links.
More accessible and convenient service x Objectives A30, A3 1, A32, A37 and A39 Need for additional park and rides X Objective A3 1 Comfort in transit services, e.g. covered waiting areas x Objective A32 Transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged (i.e., x Objective A38 seniors, handicapped) Lack of transit services in the rural portion of the corridor X Objective A27, A35 and A36 Continuation/expansion of service between Cannon BeachISeaside and X Objective A36 Portland
5 Rail Service Long-term role of rail in the corridor X Objective A40 Freight movement between the Metro area and the north coast X Objectives A 41 and A43 Interconnection of rail with other modes X Objectives A42 and A43 Effects of railroad crossing closures on lumber, dairy and other X Within the com.dor at-grade crossing are economic opportunities limited, rherefore rhe safety objecti-ve is directed at improving railroad crossing dhat are adjacent EO US26 that cause traflc backups on the highway.
6 Truck Freight Increased log truck use of US 26 when the Tillamook Bum comes on line X i Objectives A47 and A48 Increased truck freight from Hillsboro to Portland due to high tech x Interim Com'dor Strategy contain a development number of Objectives to reduce trafic on USZ6, also Truck Freight Objectives seek to reroute high tech freight to the Portland-Hillsboro Airport. Air freight connections to Portland Airport X Air freight is increasing from the Portland-Hillsboro airport, therefore the objective is to direct truck freight to Hillsboro.
file: issch3 .xls Appendix 1 - 2 sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Drafr 11/26/96
.s 5 zb 22i xS33 2 Q,T* % uuu Chapter 3 Corridor Issues TU%.-% * Comments I
Delays in freight delivery due to highway congestion Objectives A48 and A49 Increased transport of hazardous materials Objective A51; also refer to E. Safety- Hazardous Material Transport Objectives El6 and El 7 Conflicts with autos and other modes X Objectives A47 and A48 Need for additional climbing lanes in western portion of corridor x Objectives A47; also refer to B. Highway Congestion-Congestion in Rural Areas Objectives Improved connections to other corridors, e.g. US 30, US 101, 1-405 x Objective A51; also refer to C. Regional Connectivity-ConnectionBetween Places Objective C5 Truck access to North Plains industrial lands x Objective A49; also refer to B. Highway Congestion-Congestion in Rural Areas Objective B29
7 Water Transport/Ports Intermodal connections Objectives A53 an A54 Accessibility to ports for corridor freight Objective A52
8 Pipelines Meeting the need for a new pipeline by 2012 OTP identifies the need for a new pipeline; Objectives A55 and A56 seek to accommodate it. Effects of new lineslextensions of existing lines on other transportation X Objective A56 modes and facilities Accommodating pipelines in highway rights-of-way X Objective A56 Danger of exposed pipelines at Mist gas wellheads X The Com'dor Objectives do not specifically address wellhead aplosions outside of the com'dor area.
9 Telecommunications Increasing opportunities for telecommuting X Objective A57 Use of US 26 as right-of-way for fiber optic and other telecommunication X Objective A60 equipment Continuity of communications infrastructure x Objective A6 1 Siting of cellular antennas x Objectives A58
Ne: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 3 sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draft 11/26/96
-3 .s 5 b -w 23r, I c% p ?&** -3 e -C) Chapter 3 Corridor Issues TO%.,.D * Comments
10 Automobile Conflicts between growth in traffic volumes and TPR requirements x Objective A62 Relationship between plamed/potential highway improvements and x Objective A63 increases in per capita VMT Use of parallel routes to decrease reliance on state highways for intra-city X Objective A65; also refer to B. Highway trips Congestion-Congestion in Urbanized Areas Objective B18 Increased traffic associated with major employment growth in Hillsboro X Objective A63 and A64 area Concentration of traffic from the development of Town Centers at the x Objective A63; also refer to B. Highway - intersections with US 26 of Highway 217, Murray Boulevard and 185th Congestion-Congestion in Urbanized Avenue Areas Objective B15 Urban section capacity and safety improvements Interchanges X Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Urbanized Areas Objectives B21, B22, B24 and B25 Braided ramp to access Cedar Hills Boulevard X Braided ramp part of the proposed widening of US26 to Murray Boulevard. Objective B22 Widening Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Urbanized Areas Objectives B21, B22, B24 and B25 1-405 to Glencoe Road X Glencoe Road is outside of the Metro LIGB, 171e Corridor Objective is to widen only to the UGB line at Shute Road Local Access, e.g. frontage roads Objective A65; also refer to B. Highway Congestion-Congestion in Urbanized Areas Objective Bd8 Bronson Road hW Rock Creek Boulevard Cornelius Pass Road A new ramp to US 26 between Cornelius Pass and Evergreen Objective B25 Scattered development in rural areas Objective A66; also refer to B. Highway Congestion-Congestion in Rural Areas Objective B24 Rural section capacity and safety improvements Interchanges Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Rural Areas Objective B30
Jackson School Road Glencoe Road Gordon Road
file: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 4 sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Drafr 11 /26/96
.s 5 b vw 2s 2 2%14% a4 Et)L 4T* ~r a UO Chapter 3 Corridor Issues Q Comments .crlUk.,. I
Dersham Road Traflc volume are low at this interchange. Vernonia Road Traflc volumes do not warrant an interchange. Widening Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Rural Areas Objective B26 and B27 Four lanesfrom Quartz Creek Bridge to four-lane section just east of Refer to Objectives C3 and E12; me Saddle Mountain Conidor Objective for the rural sections are to seek improvements such as passing and climbing lanes to maintain the travel time in the com'dor without major capacity improvements. Passing lanes and safety improvements Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Rural Areas Objectives B26 and B28 Cannon Beach Junction to Necancium (Highway 53) Junction Lindsley Creek-West Humbug Creek passing lane Capital improvement assumption (in the STIP for consrruction) Climbing lanes Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Rural Areas Objective B26
West of Camp I8 Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locm'ons Objective El 3 Turning lanes, access management X Refer to B. Highway Congestion- Congestion in Rural Areas Objectives B26 and B29; also refer to Objectives C.3 and El 5 Manning arealNehalem Highway (OR 47) junctions (north 8nB south) Timber Road junction Camp I8 (longer turning lanes) Jewel1 Junction At Sitka Spruce viewing site Necanicwn (OR 53) Junction
Ne: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 5 sheerla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draft 11/26/96
.a- 5 b %bSL%$2 a Vl Q% 2%~- % u rD Chapter 3 Corridor Issues *DR..,* Q ,: Comments
B. HIGHWAY CONGESTION
1 Facility Management Appropriate access management standards and facility management X Objectives B1, B3, B4, B5 and B8 techniques Development of local or frontage roads Refer to A. Transportation Balance- Automobile Objective A65 Multiple accesses in rural development sections Objective B5 Closure of Barnes Road westbound on-ramp Refer to C. Regional Connectivity-
I Connections between Places Objective C8 Difficulty in crossing US 26 during congested periods I Objectives B11; also refer to C. Regional Connectiviry-Connections between Places Objective C7 New access points to state and private timber lands for management, fire X Objective B6 protection, harvesting and recreation.
2 Congestion in Urbanized Areas Reducing peak-hour congestion Objectives B12, B14, B16,B17, B18, B19 and B20 Heavy congestion at 1-405, OR81Canyon Rd., and OR217 interchanges Objectives B1, B12, B16, B17, and B19 Congestion on parallel routes in the urban area, e.g. Evergreen, Cornell Objective B12, B13 and B19 and Cornelius Pass Roads, Tualatin Valley Highway Increasing .use of local streets to bypass congested arterials Objective 53; also refer to C. Regional Connectivity-Connectiom between Places Objective CB Acceptability of lower levels of service in special transportation districts Objectives B2 and B15 such as TOD'sITown Centers Effects on emergency services Objective B18
Congestion in Rural Areas Appropriate LOSS in rural areas Objective B2 Multiple accesses Objective B4 Heavy congestion at some access points, e.g. Jackson School Road, Objective B26, B29 and B30; also refer Highway 47, Glencoe Road, Seller Road intersections to E. Safety-High Accident Locations Objective E5 Congestion at some rural access points, e.g. Camp 18, Manning, Timber Objective B26 and B29; also refer to E. RoadIVernonia intersection Safety-High Accident Locations Objective El Congestion at Camon Beach Junction to Seaside Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locations Objective El
file: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 6 sheerla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Marrix ODOT Draft 11/26/96
-c .s 5 v $P 2 2 Pb%& 2%~- 3 0 -0 Chapter 3 Corridor Issues TO2.B3 Q Comments
C. REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY
1 Connections Among Modes US 26 and Portland Airport connections X Objective C1 Intermodal connections at the Portland-Hillsboro Airport X Objective C2 Transit services from coast to Portland Airport x Refer to A. Transponation Balance- Public Transit Objective A36 Bicycle services linking the coast to other portions of the corridor X Refer to A. Transponatl'on Balance- Bicycles Objectives A10 and A1 1
2 Connections Between Places: Appropriate Travel Times Maintaining current travel times x Objective C3 Conflicts between local and through traffic x Objective C6 Role of facility management, e.g. ramp meters, in achieving appropriate X Objective C3 travel times Lack of north-south connections across US 26 x Objective C7 Difficulty in crossing US 26 at congested periods, e.g. Jackson School x Refer to E. Safe@- High Accident Road Locations Objective E3 and E6 Need for additional access points to US 26, e.g. Sellers Road, Cornelius X Refer to E. Sdety- High Accident Pass Road/Evergreen Locations Objective El Difficulty in accessing US 26 at congested periods, e.g. Nehalem kY Objective C3; also refer to Objectives Highway (at both Banks and Vernonia turnoffs) and Timber Rd. junctions B29 and B30
Glimbinglpassing lanes in western portion of corridor x Objective C4; also refer to Objectives B25 and El2 Widening of Helvetia RoadIShute Road interchange X Refer to E. Safety- High AccidenF Locations Objective El
3 Interco~ected,Cooperative Transportation Roles Among Corridor Communities Balancing local transportation needs with the ,functioning of the corridor X This is a basic objection of the Com'dor as a state highway Objectives. Refer to I. Miscellaneous Objective 13 Use of US 26 as local street in certain mral sections X Refer to B. Highway Congestion-Facility Management Objective B3, B4 and B5
Lack of or inadequate alternate routes in some portions of the corridor X Refer to B. Highway Congestion-Facility Management Objective B3, B4 and B5
file: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 7 sheerla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Drafi 11/26/96
2 .3- 3 'p.Q 2 0, $33) e3.F.E: % Ct ru Chapter 3 CornadorIssues %qu2.m. Q Comments
Improvements to I-405lUS 26 connections x Objective C8 Improvements to Highway 202 as a secondary route between Astoria and X Iqrovements to Highway 202 are Highway 26 outside of the scope of this Com'dor Plan. Objective C12, the Com'dor Objective deals with recommendations to improve the connection with US26. Improvements to Highway 53 as a route to mid-Coast X Improvements to Highway 53 are outside of the scope of this Com'dor Plan. Objective C12, the Com'dor Objective deals with recommendations to improve the connection with US26. Lack of US 26-Highway 30 connection Objective C5 Northlsouth bypass from Cannon Beach Junction to Astoria area X The Cannon Beach to Astoria bypass study is outsite of the scope of this Corridor Plan. Objective C12, the Com'dor Objective deals with recommendations to improve the connection with US26.
D. ROADWAY CONDITIONS
1 Roadway Geometry Improved stopping sight distances and approach road angles x Objective D2 Entering US 26fiom Highway- 553 Shute/Helvetia and Glencoe interchanges Long curve up to US 26/US 101 junction Slide-prone areas in Sylvan Canyon X Objective Dl Osweg Slide area x Objective Dl Steep gradelice problems, narrow shoulders (gullies on both sides of x Refer to E. Safety-High Accident . highway) in Quartz Creek area Locations Objectives E4, Elland El3 Diplslide area near East Humbug Creek x Objective Dl Design of Nehalem River Highway intersections (north and south) x Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locations Objectives El, E6 and E9 At-grade crossing at Jackson School Road x Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locations Objective E6 Design of cloverleaf at Cannon Beach Junction x Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locations Objective El Inadequate shoulders on Quartz Creek Bridge X Com'dor Objectives do not specifically address shoulders on the Quartz Creek Bridge.
file: issch3. xis Appendix 1 - 8 sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Drafr 11 /26/96
.s 2 -9 'p+?a: r, $33 S4T4 -e u -0 Chapter 3 Corridor Issues T02.u4 Comments I
E. Safety Objectives seeks to identifi unsafe highway sections and recommends a safety ranking system. If the shoulders are identified as a safety problem it will be ranked as a com'dor improvement project. Poor visibility X Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locations Objective E4 Upgrade substandard guard rails and shoulders, and pavement grades x Objective D5; also refer to E. Safety- High Accident Locations Objective E5
2 Surface Condition Weather conditions in higher elevations result in stress on highway x Objective D8 pavement Sunken grades, especially through Coast Range x Objective Dl Pavement deterioration west of Camp 18 x Objective D8 Maintenancelupgrading of bridges and tunnels x Objective B8 E. Safety Objectives seeks to identifi unsafe highway section and recommends a safety ranking system. If the rnaintenance/upgrading of bridges and tunnels are identified as a safety problem it will be ranked as a corridor improvement project. Poor visibility of striping and jersey barriers in poor weather conditions X Refer to E. Safety-High Accident Locm.ons Objective E4
.1 High Accident Locations Effects of congestion on emergency services Refer to B. Highway Congestion Objectives B1, B3, and B5 Direct access from St. Vincent Medical Center to US 26 for emergency X Objective El; also refer to C. Regional vehicles Connectivity-Znterconnected, Cooperative Tranrportac~~onRoles Among Conidor Communities Objective C8
At-grade crossings at Sell Road, RoyIMountaindale Road, and Jackson X Objectives El, E2 and E6 School Road School bus safety in crossing US 26 X Objectives El and E6 Inability to slow traffic with yellow caution lights, e.g. Sellers Road x Objectives El and E6
file: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 9 sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draft 11/26/96
.. .. $ P aP 23*. $>%& 2 rs,'d* Chapter 3 Corridor Issues 3TO%.$ 3 3 ~omments I Inability of stop signs to control traffic at Jackson School Road section 1 Objectives El and E6 Railroad tracks paralleling the highway in the Manning area cause x Objective E8 backups onto the highway (Manning area by the Grange Hall.) Winter driving conditions, icy areas, e.g., Quartz Creek Bridge x Objectives El0 and El2 Need for additional safety rest facilities and emergency assistance x Objective El 1 callboxes Multiple accesses onto US 26 in some rural sections x Objectives E6; also refer to B. Highway Congestion Objectives B2 and B5
Lack of turn lanes on US 26 in some rural sections, e.g., Timber Road, X Objectives E6 and E13; also refer to B. Manning, and Nehalem Highway Highway Congestion Objectives B3, B26, B28 and B29 Inadequate length of slow-moving vehicle turnouts x Objectives E13; also refer to B. Highway Congestion Objective B28 Exit route improvements to accommodate earthquakeltsunami events X Objective C13 Local comprehensive plans address the subject in deal. Design of US 26lHighway 47 intersections (north and south) x Objectives E2 and E6; also refer to B. Highway Congestion Objective B30 Expansion of facilities at Sunset Rest Area; need for additional rest areas X The Oregon Department of Forestry is proposing expanding public informution and interpretive programs of the State Forest areas. The Sunset Rest Area is one of those opportunity sires ODF has identified as interpretive area for the Tillamook Bum,
Uncontrolled wildfires as a hazard to motorists Refer to I. Miscellaneous Objectives I2 Inadequate warning for the Jewell-Mist junction Objective E6
' 2 Hazardous Material Transport Need for consistent alternate route(s) for hazardous materials transport x Objective El7
Traffic enforcement related to the transport of hazardous materials X Objective El6 Additional transport of hazardous wastes on US 26 when other routes, x Objective El7 e.g. US 30, are closed
3 Need for Additional Traffic Enforcement Lack of enforcement, particularly on weekends X Objective El8 and El9 Emergency service responses by volunteer fire departments is increasing X Com'dor Objectives do nor spec@cally due to limited police presence address emergency service responses by volunteer fire departments.
Appendix 1 - 10 file: issch3.xls sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draft 11/261'96
'e .s 5 -Q zb 2%L 2>%@ Ftt Q-T* Chapter 3 Corridor Issues 2 8 $ Comments
Objective El8 does recommend law enforcement to focus on areas of high accident rates. Enforcement of slow-moving vehicle use of turnouts Objective El9 Enforcement of truck speed limits and lane use regulations Objective El9
F. ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY IMPACTS
1 Scenic Resources Additional protection beyond that currently provided for sensitive scenic X Objective F1 areas Maintenance of tree canopy X Objective F2 and F4 Blowdown in areas of minimal buffers x Objectives F4 and F5 Additional scenic turnouts X Objective F2 Screening of ODOT maintenance/storage areas x Objective F7 Conflicts between safety and other improvements and scenic resources x Objective F2
2 Natural Resources Identification/avoidance of impacts to sensitive habitats x Objectives F8, F9, F10 and F12 Impacts to migration routes for big game x Objectives F11, and F13 Protection or avoidance of wetland impacts for projects such as highway X Objectives F8, F9, F10 and F12 widening and bridges
3 Air Quality Promotion of alternative modes to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) X Objectives F14 and F16 per capita within the Portland airshed Maintaining compliance with federal and state air quality standards with X Objectives F14 and F16 increase population growth and resultant congestion and increased VMT
4 Water QualityIQuantity Water quality problems created by existing facilities Objective F17 Sand from maintenance activities being swept into creeks Objectives F17 and F18 Multiple river crossings Objectives F17 and F18 Increased run-off with additional impervious surfaces Objectives F17 and F18 Siltration from highway improvements and construction practices Objectives F17 and F18 Accidental spills with hazardous waste transport Refer to E. Safety-Hazardous Material Transpon Objective El6
5 Energy Conservation
file: issch3.xls Appendix 1 - 11 sheerla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Drafr 11/26/96
w ."- b L -b 2% 228% 2KT-r Chapter 3 Corridor Issues 8TU~.~2 3 2 Comments I
Providing alternate, energy efficient modes for traveling the entire x Objectives F21 and F22 corridor Transit service in the western end of the corridor x Refer to A. Transponation Balance- Public Transit Objectives A27 and A35
G. SOCIAL AND LAND USE IMPACTS
1 Effects on Community Livability Sensitivity to community facilities during project planning Objective GI Proximity of small communities to the highway Objective G1 and G2 Impacts to 4(f) resources (parks) during project construction Section 467 of the Depamnent of Transponation Act of 1966 provides procedures for protecting resources such as parks or school propem'es that are affected by highway projects. Effects of highway and airport noise on adjoining and nearby properties X Objective 61 also refer to A. Transportation Balance-Air Service A1 and A2 Coordination with Native American Tribes and other groups x Objective G3
2 Land Use Impacts Continued residential, commercial and industrial development x Objectives G7, G8 and G9 Planned Town Centers at three urban interchanges -- Highways 21 7/26, Murray Boulevard, 185th Avenue Deveiopment proposed at US 26/Cornelius Pass Road interchange Growth in the Banks area Large growth in employment in northeast Hillsboro Increased traffic resulting from growth within the Metro UGB, any UGB X Objectives 67, 68and 69 expansions and rural development . Residential development east of Cannon Beach x Objective G7 Transportation-efficient land use patterns that reduce VMT and promote a X Objective G8 and G9 livelwork balance Effects of factory mall outlets and other strip development in Seaside on X Objective G13 functioning of Highway IOlIHighway 26 area Lack of adequatelconsistent standards for building setbacks from highway X Objective GI2 and GI4 and local arterial rights-of-way "Green Corridor" between UGB and North Plains x Objective G12 North Plains UGB expansion X North Plains UGB Study finded with a TGM grant is currently under way. The study's recommendations will be incorporated into the Com'dor Strategy.
Appendix 1 12 file: issch3.xls - sheetla Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Issues Matrix ODOT Draft 11/26/96
Chapter 3 Corridor Issues
Effects of land use development on highway facilities, e.g. slides x Objective G7 Increased commercial development at the corridor's west end x Objective G12 and G13
H. ECONOMIC IMPACTS
1 Economic Development Role of the corridor in supporting/promoting economic development x Objectives H1 and H3 Improvements to US 26 to maintain accessibility x Objective H2 Highway design to facilitate freight movement x Objective H2
2 Recreation Opportunities Role of corridor in promoting/supporting recreation uses X Objectives H4, H5 and H9 Safe and adequate access to recreation facilities x Objective H3 Adequate signing for recreation sites x Objective H6 Impacts to 4(f) resources (i.e., parks, historic sites) x The Federal Law, Codified as 23 U.S.C. Sec 138 and known as Section 4V) requires that any project funded with Federal funds provide procedures for protecting public parks or school properties affected by highway projects
Additional rest stops X Highway maintenance to ensure convenient/comfortable recreation travel X Refer to D. Roadway Conditions Objections D4,D5, 07, and D8 Providing public access to forest lands Objectives H7and H8 Recreation planning and interpretive programs Objectives H7and H8
file: isscN .xls Appendix 1 - 13 sheetla Appendix 2
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIVES COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafr 11/26/96 Preliminary Objectives - Comments and Responses From ODOT IT' staff and Other State Agencies IRT
Each comment State staff made on the draft Corridor Strategy is listed below. The Corridor Management Team (CMT) has made a recommendation on how it applies to the document, and the Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG) has also made recommendations. In cases where recommends are for change from the previous draft, additions are in italics and deletions are fkike$ out.
A. Transportation Balance
Air Service A.5 Comment - Who would use the shuttle service to Astoria? Would it be better to provide a shuttle service to Seattle or San Francisco Bay Area? or other high tech areas outside Oregon?
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Comment noted. Modify objective to read: A.5 Encourage private wpwt land andlor air shuttle service to the Astoria Regional Airport from Hillsboro Airport or Portland International Airport.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Bicycles A.7 Comment -delete 'pedestrian' and move to pedestrian section.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation. Comment noted. No change to objective.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modiped by the CMT
, A.8 Comment - delete objective
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: State does not designate bicycle routes on new plan. Change to read: A.8 Maintain US 26 as a bicycle route, with iwegM4m use of local parallel routes as alternative routes where feasible.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Appendix 2 - 1 Ne: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draft 11/26/96
A.ll Comment - shoulder widening or additional of bike lanes as a separate projects as well as in conjunction with other highway projects. Reasoning - many segments which are not adequate for bicycles will not be scheduled for improvements because they are considered adequate for vehicle travel.
corridor Management Team Recommendation: Change to read: A. 11 Addlimprove bicycle lanes or widen shoulders as part of highway improvement projects or us separate projects where feasible.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
A. 16 Comment - objective is not very realistic. Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Comment noted. No change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted
A. 18 Comment - traffic in the Sunset Tunnel is high speed and the volumes are too great to be controlled by signals.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Change to read: A. 18 Investigate sigmke other measures to facilitate safe bicycle passage through Sunset Tunnel.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Pedestrians A.21 Comment - objective should be two separate bullets, different issues.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Comment noted. No change
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted
Public Transit A.31 and A.35 Comment - Both objectives deal with 'vanpools' to large employment centers; reword into one objective?
Appendix 2 - 2 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draft 11/26/96
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Delete A3 1, and renumber accordingly (A35 becomes A34).
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
A.36 and A.37 Comment - preliminary objectives do not appear to carry out the minimum levels of service for transit called for the OTP. "investigating opportunities to expand transit service in rural portion of the corridor" and "encouraging enhanced transit service" avoids any commitment or responsibility to implement the OTP.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Comment noted. No change. The objectives are to identify needs, and commitments; responsibilities are to be assigned to the next phase of the Plan. Note: due to renumbering, these are now A35 and A36.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Comment - Add objective: Improve pedestrian access to transit stops with sidewalks, street crossings and safer intersection design.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Add new objective to read: A.39 Improve pedestrian access to transit stops with sidewalks, street crossings and safer intersection design.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Itail Service A.40 Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Comment - Delete:
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
A.42 and A.43 Comment - Similar policies, need to define commodities.
Corridor Management Team Comment noted. No change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Appendix 2 - 3 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draft 11/26/96
Truck Freight A.47 Com'dor Management Team Recommendation: Delete objective - project in the STIP to be constructed
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
A.52 51 Com'dor Management Team Recommendation. Add the word 'better' to the sentence.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Water TransportIPorts A.55 54 Comment - define what types of intermodal transportation facility are needed at POTB.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Modify objective to read: A.55 54 Bevehp Investigate opportunities to establish an intermodal transportation facility at the Port of Tillarnook Bay.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Telecommunications A.55 CTAG Recommendation: Delete objective
Automobile ' A.48 66 Comment - suggest revision of objective to read: Encourage concentration of rural services within rural community centers to reduce the need for auto trips. Goal 11 and 14 limit uses and services in rural areas to those that serve rural needs. Current objective language could be read to encourage any and all services in rural areas.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Comment noted. No change. County land use and zoning regulations designate type and intensity of uses in rural community centers.
Appendix 2 - 4 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draft 11 /26/96
CTAG Recommerzdation: Comment noted - No change
B. Highway Congestion
Facility Management B.7 Comment - Interchanges, intersections and interchange management plans in rural areas needs to be clarified. Management Plans should not be simply be deferred to be addressed in local TSPs. Interchange improvements that are provided in response to safety concerns (i.e., to provide safe crossing opportunities) substantially increase the capacity of these intersections to support additional traffic. This creates pressure for more intense land uses which are typically inconsistent with planning requirements which discourage more intense uses on rural lands.
The plan should include an "Issues" discussion, that notes the potential for intersection improvements and interchanges to create pressure for more intense land uses. This should also note that more intense land uses are generally inappropriate on rural lands and over time tend to conflict with the function of the highway.
Suggested revision of objective: Development of intersection treatments and improvements which address safety concerns in a manner which minimizes creation of additional capacity for more intense use of nearby rural lands. (This might include offset intersections, overpasses without on and off ramps etc.)
Interchange management plans to limit land uses in the vicinity of rural intersections and interchanges to be consistent with future operation of the highway.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Modify objective to read: B.7 Develq Design interchange treatments and improvements to minimize adverse impacts on rural lad, e.g., ofset intersections, overpasses without on- and 08-ramps, and to be consistent with theJSuture operation of the highway.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Revise objective: B. 7 Develop interchange management plans as part of local TSPs.
Develop new objective in Land Use Impact section refer to G.16.
Congestion in Url~anizedAreas B. 12 Comment - "programmed highway improvements" should be referenced to current Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) .
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Modify objective to read: B. 12 Increase the capacity of the urban portion of US 26 through programmed highway widening improvements, i. e., State Transportatl'on Improvement Program (SZ7P).
Appendix 2 - 5 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draj? 11/26/96
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Com'dor Management Team Recommendation: Add Objective this section and renumber accordingly: B.23 Investigate widening of US 26 to six lanes from Murray Boulevard to the Metro UGB (Shute Road).
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
CTAG Recommendation: Add Objective this section and renumber accordingly: B.25 Investigate construction of eastbound on-ramp to US 26 at Cornelius Pass Road, eliminating left turn across Cornelius Pass Road.
Congestion in Rural Areas
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Add Objective this section and renumber accordingly: B.25 Provide no expansion in highway capacity outside the Metro UGB, except for climbing/passing lanes and turning lanes and to address safety-related needs.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Modified: B.25 Provide no expansion in highway capacity outside the Metro UGB. Provide climbing/passing lanes and turning lanes, and other improvements to address safety-related issues.
B.2? B.28 Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Delete - Passing lane at Lindsley Creek-West Humbug Creek. Part of the SIIP,for comtncction.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
' B.29 B.30 Corridor Management Team Recommendation: CMT recommends moving the Gordon Road reference ramps to B 29 30. Modify the objective to read: B.30 Investigate the following improvements to provide for safe and efficient auto and truck operations in rural areas: Interchange at Staley Junction (US 26 and OR Highway 47); ad Interchange at Jackson School Road; and Ramps at Gordon.
Appendix 2 - 6 frle: pre-obj2 .doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafr 11/26/96
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved and modified: Add: Upgrade interchange at Glencoe Road.
B.27 B.30 Comment - preliminary objective should be revised so that it does no presume that interchanges are the preferred solution to addressing safety and capacity problems.
Suggested revise: Develop a detailed plan (including management measures, land use and access control and physical improvements) to provide for safe and eficient auto and truck operations at Staleys Junction, Jackson School Road intersections and Gordon Road overpass.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, and as part of the investigation other measure to deal with the problems will be suggested other than a full interchange. The first step in the process is to identify and describe the issue, then seek solutions.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - no change
C. Regional Connectivity
Modal Connections C.2 CTAG Recommendation: Delete Bevdef3, Add Investigate
Interconnected, Cooperative Transportation Roles Among Corridor Communities C.8 Comment - drop refer to US 2411-405 improvements
Corridor Management Team The need to investigate improvements to US 24/I-405 interchange is based on the Reconnaissance Project listed in the STIP to modernize the connection. Research indicates to reconnaissance project is for the connection of Front Avenue to the Ross Island Bridge. This reconnaissance project in outside of the corridor. Therefore the CMT recommends the refer be dropped in the Objective.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - no change in objective
C.9 Comment - define the objective
Corridor Management Team CMT recommends that Objectives C9 and C10 be combined into one objective.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - no change in objectives
Appendix 2 - 7 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafr 11/26/96
C. 12 Comment - preliminary objective should be reworded. Improved connections to the corridor could include additional connections other than those listed, which could easily conflict with access management strategies call for in the plan.
Suggested revision: Improved highway to highway connections between US 26 and Highways 47, 53, and 202.
Corridor Management Team CMT recommends the preliminary objective be revised per the comment.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
CTAG Recommendation: Add Objective this section: C.13 Investigate seismic retrofitting of US 26, e.g. Quartz Creek Bridge, needed to maintain access to Corridor communities.
D. Roadway Conditions
Roadway Geometry D. 1 Comment - to improve sections with above average accident rates -- is premature. Weather, drive familiarly, long average trip distance, alcohol use and other factors may be more significant factors contributing to higher rates of accidents, making other strategy more appropriate than simply highway improvements. Other strategies include increased enforcement and non-improvement techniques -- such as signing, striping, lighting, etc.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, the CMT recommends adding an objective stating that other safety strategies should be investigate before physical improvements to a roadway. Objective should be in Safety section. D.7 CTAG Recommendation: Delete , Add Investigate
E. Safety Comment - Aviation should be included in section.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends adding an objective about airport safety and land uses.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
Appendix 2 - 8 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draji 11/26/96
High Accident Locations E. 1 Comment - same as D. 1. Suggest A corridor-wide evaluation of accident records to develop a safety strategy that includes a variety of measures.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends adding an objective; E.3 A corridor-wide evaluation of accident records to develop a safety strategy that includes a variety of measures.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved and modified
E.5 E.6 Comment - crossings should be changed to intersections
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends the change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved as modified by the CMT
El5 Comment - This directly contradicts the improvement objectives for the highway. Why is this policy (improvements outside the UGB only to improve safety) only mentioned here?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, the CMT recommends the objective to be deleted.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recornmen
Need for Additional Traffic Enforcement E.33 and E.24E. 19 Comment - slow moving vehicle regulations and lane regulations should be defined.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted. CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted -Combine the three objectives: , E.19 Provide additional law enforcement presence, particularly on weekends, to increase enforcement of motor vehicle codes, including slow moving vehicle regulations, truck speed limits, and lane use regulations.
F. Environmental and Energy Impacts Scenic Resources
Appendix 2 - 9 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafr 11/26/96
F.2 Comment: Objective should be removed or change. Reference was to the Oregon Department of Forestry to seek opportunities to develop interpretive areas along the highway to describe or display information about historical events.
Corripor Management Team Recommendation: Change objective to read: F.2 The Oregon Department of Forestry as part of the Interpretive Master Plan shall investigate opportunities to develop interpretive areas along US 26 Highway.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Delete objective; refer to Objective H. 7
Natural Resources F. 10 Comment - delete "during construction".
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Air Quality %I4 F. 14 Comment - insert "per capita" after VMT
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends the change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved (=MT recommendation
F. 18 Comment: Why limit speed enforcement to large trucks?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends delete objective.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation Energy Conservation F.23 Comment - examples of how this could be done.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
Appendix 2 - 10 fde: pre-obj2.doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draft 11/26/96
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
F.24 Comment - fueling sites for what?
Corridor Marzagement Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends defining alternative fueling sites.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Delete objective
G. Community and Land Use Impacts
Effects on Community Livability G.2 Comment - how will pedestrian crossing be identified and improved.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
G.4 Comment - where are the fountains?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends location of springs.
CTAG Recommend&'on: Comment noted -Deleted and add Retain
6.5 Comment - why move the marker.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification. Public comment and safety concerns.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
CTAG Recommendation: Add objective: G.6 Investigate traffic management measures, such as reducing speed limits to promote the livability of rural communities through which US 26 passes.
Appendix 2 - 11 Ne: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Draft 11/26/96
Land Use Impacts G.3 G.8 Comment - Added "per capita" after VMT.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends the change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
G.44 G.11 Comment - added "adverse" before impacts.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends the change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
G.43 G.14 Comment - - added "adverse" before impacts.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends the change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
H. Economic Impact
Economic Development Comment - aviation should be within section.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved GUT recommendation
H.1 Comment - define optimize.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends modification to delete 'optimize'
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Appendix 2 - 12 fde: pre-obj2.doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafr 11 /26/96
H.3 Comment - examples of projects.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Recreation Opportunities H.4 Comment - was demand considered?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Comment - Add preservation of access points to objective.
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends: add and preserve
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted, no change to objective H.5 Comment - define 'limited'
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification. The objective is to note a need the action should define the problem.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
H.4 Comment - how would signs be improved?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification. The objective is to note a need the action should define the problem.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Appendix 2 - 13 file: pre-obj2.doc Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafr 11/26/96
H.7 Comment - insert 'the' before Oregon
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends the change.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Comment: ODOF has a Recreation Plan and Interpretive Master Plan.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Modify objective: H.7 In cooperation with the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODOF), &&p implement a the ODOF Recreation Plan and Interpretive Master Plan within the corridor.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
H.8 Comment: Delete Sunset Wayside and insert displays for centers. Sunset Wayside areas have no access, difficult to develop for recreational use.
Corridor Management Team Recommendation: Modify objective: H.8 Develop interpretive displays cate~and trails at tk"the Sunset Rest Area.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
H.9 Comment - what is 'recreational air activities'?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
I. Miscellaneous I. 1 CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - CTAG recommends adding 'but not limited to ' to the Objective 1.2
Appendix 2 - 14 fde: pre-obj2.doc Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Preliminary Objectives Comments and Response ODOT Drafi 11i26/96
1.2 and 1.3 Comment - move to Safety Section
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - CTAG recommends deleting 1.2
1.4 1.3 Comment - how would the advisory group relate to SHAGS proposed by ODOT re-engineering?
Corridor Management Team Comment is noted, CMT recommends no modification.
CTAG Recommendation: Comment noted - Approved CMT recommendation
Appendix 2 - 15 file: pre-obj2.doc Appendix 3
CTAG ROSTER Portland - Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan Roster of CTAG Members ODOT Draft 1 1/26/96 Portland - Cannon Beach Junction (US 26) Corridor Technical Advisory Group (CTAG) Members
Multnomah County John Dorst, Engineering Services Washington County Scott King, Senior Planner Washington County Mark Brown, Principal Planner Clatsop County Randy Trevillian, Public Works Director Portland Steve Dotter, Transportation Planning Manager Beaverton Margaret Middleton, Planner Hillsboro Wink Brooks, Planning Director Hillsboro Roy Gibson, Public Works Director North Plains Gary Dougherty, Director of Public Works North Plains Hank Drexel Banks Robert Pickett, Recorder Banks City Manager Cornelius John Greiner, City Manger Forest Grove Ivan Burnett, Manger Forest Grove Carl Mawson, City Administrator Vernonia Michael McAlvage Vernonia Fred Oviatt Cannon Beach Rainmar Bartl, City Planner Cannon Beach John Williams, City Manger Seaside Gene Miles, City Manager Gearhart Dennis McNally, Administrator Metro Terry Whistler, Transportation Planning Tri-Met Joe Walsh, Transit Development Port of Tillamook Bay Jack Crider, Manger Port of Portland Craig Smith, Senior Aviation Planner ODOT Region 1 Fred Eberle, Corridor Planner ODOT Region 2 John deTar & Dan Fricke ODOT Region 1, District 2A Harold Lasley, Manager ODOT Region 2, District 1 Carl Wieseke, Assistant Manager OR Dept. of Forestry Chris Friend, Tillamook State Forest Appendix 4
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROCESS (to be added at a later date) October 10, 1995
PORTLAND-CANNON BEACH JUNCTION CORRIDOR PLAN REPORT ON PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES
A. INTRODUCTION
As part of the Strategy development phase of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan, open houses were held in October, 1995 at the following locations:
+ October 2 Washington County Public Services Building, Hillsboro + October 4 Convention Center, Seaside
The purpose of the open houses was to disseminate information on the corridor planning process and to solicit public input on issues to be addressed in the Corridor Plan. The open houses were advertised through the September 1995 Corridor Plan newsletter, press releases, public service announcements and notices in community newsletters.
Activities included:
+ Livelwork map -- using dots, attendees indicated where they lived and worked; + Storyboards on the corridor planning process; + Aerial video of the corridor; + Site-specific issue identification -- using stickees, participants identified site-specific issues and transportation system improvements on a map of the Corridor planning area; + Storyboards comparing existing traffic volumes, travel times, congestion and other attributes of the corridor with future conditions if no improvements are made, if improvements are limited, or if no major capacity increases are made; + Prioritization of preliminary themes -- using dots, participants prioritized preliminary themes identified through local government and stakeholder scoping, and identified additional themes that should be priorities;
+ Miscellaneous questions; and
+ Questionnaires.
B. SITE-SPECIFIC ISSUES
Participants identified a wide variety of site-specific issues to be addressed in the Corridor Plan. These are organized by the open house below.
Hillsboro O~enHouse Cannon Beach Junction - Necancium Junction -- passing lanes whole way. RuraI portion of corridor -- four-lane passing lanes entire length. Urban segment -- widen to six lanes Freeway bypass through UGB (where bulk of population resides) will relieve TV Highway -- a complete mess. Regular passenger rail service to coast on weekends (with state subsidy) Tunnel to Jewel1 Junction Alternate high speed route (minimum 4-lane) to Tillamook is needed now. Police to enforce slow vehicles use of turnouts. Lengthen short turnouts. Improve all sunken grades in Coast Range. Overpass for turn at Vernonia/Buxton. Bypass from 219 (Hillsboro) to Cornelius Pass and US 30 (2) Bypass north from Hillsboro over Columbia to 1-5 at Woodland. Bypass through Beaverton and to 1-5. Hillsboro bypass (4 lanes, divided by landscape similar to 205 at Stafford area) will relieve Hwy 26 and 217 stop and go conditions. Land use planning could encourage use of Dersharn Road access to alleviate excess at Glencoe Road. Jackson Road absolutely needs an overpass with on/off ramps. Currently extremely dangerous. Construct 6-8 lanes from 185th to downtown Portland, similar to 1-5 in Seattle --would relieve msh hour congestion.
Seaside O~enHouse
HIGHWAY 26 + Need right turn lane at Manning due to traffic speed through area. + Improve Highway 26 from Portland to Cannon Beach Junction. + Turn lanes on Highway 26. Check DMV for most accidents, then fix that area. + Extension of Westside light rail. + Possible rail to Seaside? Install a rail system parallel if possible with Highway 26. + Discourage urbanization (sprawl) between metropolitan urban growth boundary to terminus. + Bypass from 1-5 south of Tigard to Hillsboro then the coast. 4 Construct 4 lanes on Hwy 26 from Portland to Cannon Beach Junction. (3) 4 Provide equestrian routes (oversized pedestrian and bicycle paths) as alternate direct routes in some areas -- trail along 26, looping or connecting to 202, etc. Turning lane to Jewel1 frorn 26. I3ighwiy 26 frorn Portland to Cannon Beach must be four lanes because of more use of Coast, because of high tech growth in Hillsboro/Forest Grove area. Coast people need Highway 26 to get medical help in Beaverton -- please widen. Draft nature photographers presently among ODOT employees to drive corridor at own pace, looking at scenery that needs protection to enhancement. Be sure that highway is photogenic. Do not eliminate tree canopy -- one of more glorious views en route to coast (noticed by newcomers) is area where tall old trees shade road and branches extend over road. Instead of a thin row of trees along highway (that's more to blow down), have mix of clumps of trees (that withstand blowdown) and "honest" views of logging operations. Develop usage of small bus service (vans) for runs from coast to Portland park and ride facilities near Cannon Beach Junction, express se~ceto Washington Square and downtown Portland. Discourage design that brings Clatsop County within California commuting distance of Metro area -- i.e. do not make Hwy 26 a freeway. Avoid generating noise, pollution -- i.e. do not build a highway that stimulates more traffic (especially Portland to coast daytrips). Passing lanes between Cannon Beach Junction and Hwy 53 Junction. (Winston-Coos Bay) Highway 58 is so much better and so much less travelled than 26 -- something is wrong. Route has fog (clouds) and wildlife (elk to deer) -- avoid encouraging high speed driving in road design. Encourage work of ODOT landscape architects to do plantings of native shrubs, etc. instead of vegetation free zones. Better barrier for wildlife (deer/elk), longer sight and line crossings where pass. Safety for vehicles and bicycles, Reliable public transit carrier.
HIGHWAY 202 4 Improve Highway 202 as a scenic, gently winding, safe secondary route from Astoria to Highway 26; let it follow landforms -- not straightened unnecessari!y (some geometric improvements).
HCHWAY 101 b Address traffic in Seaside, on weekends particularly. + Construct a center turn lane in Seaside. 4 Develop an alternate route above the coast to avoid continued slides on Highway 101. 4 Highway 101 needs more passing lanes. 4 Construct a 101 Bypass from Astoria to Seaside. Plan John Day Bridge to Cannon Beach Junction. 4 Make 101 from Cannon Beach Junction to John Day Bridge to bypass all 3 towns. 4 Center turn on in Seaside-parkway. 4 Improve Seaside with center turn lanes through town. No parkway. + Fix cloverleaf at to Cannon Beach Junction -- too tight. + A bypass of Seaside as soon as possible -- like the Cannon Beach bypass. + Highway 101 -- at least a turning lane (widen road). Turn signals 12th, G Avenue, traffic cop at U Avenue and get rid of access to Safeway off highwaylchange to Broadway. + "Low management" of 261101 in Seaside where local "planning" has ignored impact of factory outlet mall and Safeway strip on traffic, then looks to ODOT (and state) to rescue it from its own bad planning. + Modify curves, place signal or turning lane at North Exit to Cannon Beach. + Emergency and scenic (low speed) back road between 101 and 53 (via existing back road routing, but mildly improved) -- near Clatsop/Tillamook line (some geometric improvements).
HIGHWAY 53 + Turn off lanes between Cannon Beach and 53 Junction. + Modify some of the 69 curves in Highway 53.
C, PRELIMINARY THEMES
Participants were asked to prioritize preliminary themes identified through local government and agency scoping. Each person was provided three dots for "voting" on priorities.
following priorities: (1) Maintenance of the existing facility to ensure that it remains safe and functional, e.g. fudng potholes (2) Preservation of the roadway by investing in roadbed and pavement 8. Application of the most restrictive access management standards (regulating the number, spacing, type, opportunities for left turns and location of driveways, intersections and traffic signals) for both local 5 122% arterials and U.S. 26, consistent with existing or planned adjacent land uses. 9. Transportation-efficient land use patterns that reduce vehicle miles traveled pdpromote a live/work balance. 4 9.9% 10. Targeting of realignment and other improvements outside the Metro UGB to sections with above-average accident rates. 3 73% 11. Prioritization of projects that support increased recreation and tourism. 1 2.4% TOTAL 41 100%
Additional Themes
Other themes identified by participants for potential consideration in the Corridor Plan include:
Improved intersection with 1-405. Rail service from Portland to Seaside. (2) - Any kind of rail service from Portland to the coast for passengers and freight. Speed here is a factor. (2) Improve US 26 to 4-lane freeway to coast and six lanes from 185th to downtown Portland. Improve Highway 6 and US 99W -- Portland's closest routes and easy access. Widen four lanes from Quartz Creek bridge to meet up with four lanes just east of Saddle Mountain. Four lanes for passing and turning on Hwy 26 four and a half miles before the junction of 101 and 26 -- for sightseers to visit largest Sitka Spruce. Icy roads and bridges. Total bypass from Cannon Beach Junction to John Day Bridge to make north/south travel passable. Improve exit routes if earthquake happens followed by wave of water (tsunami). Need transportation from coast to Beaverton hospital for medical needs -- none available now, i.e, cancer treatment -- radiation, chemotherapy. Slow cars must be taught to pull over where there are two lanes -- many Washington cars ignore the "slow lane" rule.
D. MISCELLANEOUS QUESTIONS
Flipcharts were randomly located to provide opportunities for input on the following questions: 1) What are the most important actions to be taken to improve bicycle and pedestrian transportation? 2) What are the most important actions to be taken to improve transit service? 3) What are the most important actions to be taken to improve freight movement (by truck, air or water)? 4) How should transportation system improvements be financed?
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
Safer pedestrian crossings in rural communities. Provide bicycle lanes for bicycling. Differentiate between recreational biking and biking to work, shop, etc. Spend money for the latter. Separate bicycle/pedestrian paved trail (bikeway) as inEugene/Monrnouth/Beaverton, to coast -- both routes (Tillamook/Cannon Beach/Seaside) -- limited access -- 100 to 200 feet from main auto roadway with separate bridges, underpasses, etc., with maintenance maintained. Bikes on rural transit lines (rail or bus). Work with the cities to expand bicycle and pedestrian paths. See that the bicycle paths don't suddenly narrow and become dangerous. Use old railroad right-of-way along Highway 101 in Seaside. Link pedestrian routes with van service -- "flag stops" along corridor, phone access to dispatcher for route.
Transit Service Improvements
Provide more park and ride lots. Quality of service currently stinks. Comfort (better equipment, seats, waiting areas). Timely (more often, more direct routes). Light rail is fun (except summer when no air conditioning) -- buses stir& too small and hard seating areas, not friendly to disabilities. Land use/transportation planning linkages. Seriously look at funding, engineering and development (and develop incentives -- us, state and local) of high speed train. More local service on coast -- Tillamook to Astoria. Passenger rail to Astoria and Tillamook (MAX type or RDC coaches). Transit needs to connect the user to the desired destination. Transit services need to be accessible to the user. Transit service needs to conveniently take the user to his/her destination, i.e. Hillsboro to Tigard isn't convenient and walking two miles to catch the Hillsboro bus isn't convenient either. Let vans (small buses) carry 200 or so pounds small freight on corridor between downtown and coast (link freight and public transit). + Follow through with employer programs to increase carpooling, flex-time, transit rider incentives. r Try twice per week van (small bus) from new park and ride lots in Seaside and near Cannon Beach Junction, making round trip, depart coast around 9:30 am, depart Portland around 4 pm to coast. Reservations (advance ticket purchase would be okay). r Relatively little regulation -- commercial driver's license and safety inspected vehicles and insurance, so small operators could inventively attract market niches (limos, taxis, vans, small buses, etc.)
3. Freight Movement Improvements r Heavy rail from Tillamook to Portland. Then a truck up and down coast with goods from vendors. Have a truck lane only to coast using Hwy 26, i.e. widen. r Give trucks own right-hand lane and two lanes for autos, so six lanes in all. r Dedicated truck and RV road. r Identi& the various means and routes by which freight can be transported from source to destination. r Improve rail line from Portland to Tillamook and Astoria for both freight and passengers.
4. Transportation System Improvement Financing r Use lottery money (this is real economic development -- no roads, no business; no business, no jobs). r Gas tax, not property tax. + Gas tax and toll. r Revenue bonds backed by tolls. r Tax to be paid by the users. Spend fuel taxes on cross-section of transit forms (rail, vans), equals "affirmative action" after years of creating subsidized dominant highway infrastructure.
E, QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
Number of completed questionnaires: 7
1. What are the three most important issues to address in the Plan? r Increased capacity -- more through lanes (4 or 6 lanes); more passing lanes and truck lanes (could be separate -- 4 lanes); more bike lanes. + Safety of highway corridor. ODOT and others state agencies have the accident records -- study, compile and fix it. Congestion within the rural segment, specifically Cannon Beach Junction to Hwy 47 Junction. ODOT and other state agencies have the accident records -- study, compile and fix. Very limited passing opportunities -- Cannon Beach Junction to Hwy 53 Junction. Add passing lanes or additional 4-lane segments. Traffic through Seaside on 101 is becoming much too heavy. It is difficult to turn at Broadway and unsafe. 101 should bypass Seaside, from Cannon Beach Junction to (or beyond) Astoria. TraEfic in the area of Elderberry Inn is sometimes dangerous -- the Jewell-Mist turnoff is unsafe. There should be a passing lane, or at least a crossroads sign to indicate the Jewell-Mist turnoff is coming up. Two-lane highway sections. Widen Hwy 26 the whole length. Impact on users. Put extra lanes of use in on existing passing areas now and where needed. Time of implementation. As fast as possible. Cost-environmental impact. Gas taxes. Relieve traffic on Hwy 101 in Seaside. Make sure it stays in the STIP. Improve Hwy 26 but only after Hwy 101 is improved. Too much traffic congestion on Hwy 101 from Astoria to Cannon Beach Junction. Bypass from John Day Bridge east of Astoria to Cannon Beach Junction on 101. Auto safety on Hwy 26 from Portland to Seaside. Four lane highway all the way. Limited access lanes. Straighten out many curves to allow better vision. Traffic congestion north to south on Hwy 101 through Seaside. Safety of residents an issue in case of emergency exist Bypass from John Day Bridge to Cannon Beach Junction. Earthquake proof bridges in Seaside and on Hwy 26.
What other issues should be addressed?
Bridges, tunnels, and repair or build new ones. Better planned route to safety for north coast residents in case of a tsunami. 3. Through interviews with local governments, several prelim identified to guide development of the corridor plan.-Using a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being strongly agree and 5 being strongly disagree, indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following:
ty (to six lanes) within the Metro
ccommodate a limited portion of
Increased freight movement via rail etween the Metro area and the
plisation of the most restrictive
ays, intersections and
patterns that reduce vehicle miles traveled and promote a live/work k. Prioritization of projects that 3 1 1 1 support increased recreation and tourism.
4. What types of future public involvement opportunities would be best? (J)
Newsletters 4 Public hearings 3 Open houses 7 Other (please specify): 2 Questionnaires Newspapers
5. Other comments?
+ Time between ODOT newsletter and open houses must be increased. + Give advance notice in local papers. Notify people that came to any of the open houses. Most important -- be serious and work fast. October 8,1996
PORTLAND-CANNON BEACH JUNCTION CORRIDOR PLAN REPORT ON PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES AND QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
A. INTRODUCTION
As part of the Interim Corridor Strategy development phase of the Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan, open houses were held in September 1996 at the following locations:
September 9 City Hall, Cannon Beach September 12 Community Center, North Plains
The purpose of the open houses was to disseminate information on the corridor planning process and to solicit public input on preliminary objectives and priorities to be addressed in the Corridor Plan. The open houses were advertised through an August 1996 Corridor Plan newsletter, press releases, public service announcements and notices in community newsletters.
Activities included:
Live/work map - using dots, attendees indicated where they lived and worked; Storyboards on the corridor planning process; Storyboards comparing existing traffic volumes, travel times, congestion and other attributes of the corridor with future conditions if no improvements are made, if improvements are limited, or if no major capacity increases are made; e Aerial video of the corridor; e Prioritization of key objectives - using dots, participants pPioritized key objectives and identified additional objectives that should be prioritized; e Site-specific priority identification - using stickees, participants identified site- specific priorities for transportation system improvements on a map of the Corridor planning area; and Miscellaneous questions.
Public input on key objectives was also solicited through questionnaires included in the August 1996 Corridor Plan newsletter. B. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIVES
Participants were asked to prioritize key objectives identified by the CTAG. Each person was provided five dots for "voting" on priorities.
Objective No. Percent Highway Capacity within the UGB Limit expansion of Highway 26 within the Metro urban growth 0 0 boundary (UGB)to widening to six lanes between 1-405 and the UGB (Shute Road) and currently programmed interchange improvements (e.g., Sylvan and Canyon Road). In lieu of expanding Highway 26 capacity beyond that indicated in 3 3 Question 1, implement Transportation Demand Management . . strategies (e.g. carpooling, telecommuting), expand transit services, and increase reliance upon local streets for local trips.
land use reguIations that
pedestrian crossing opportunities, particularly at rural community from the Portland area to coastal communities. Encourage and facilitate the use of the Port of Tillamook Bay rail line 8 7 for: a) transport of lumber, aggregate and other bulk products 0 0 b) excursion/ tourism uses. 0 0 Safety and geometry improvements Target.highway improvements to sections with above average 14 13 accident rates, slide prone areas, and sections with high congestion rates where there is a favorable costlbenefit ratio. Focus additional law enforcement to entrances/exits of rural 1 1 community centers, areas of high accident rates, and where travel speeds should be reduced (e.g. sunken grades/slide areas). Improve Highway 26 connections to 1-405 and Cornelius Pass Road 10 9 within the corridor's urban portion; and to Highways 47,53, and 202 within the rural portion. Environmental and economic impacts Design new improvements and retrofit existing transportation 2 2 facilities to encourage the conservation, restoration and protection of natural resources, particularly coastal salmon habitat.
Additional Objectives
Other objectives identified by participants for potential consideration in the Corridor Plan include:
Extend climbing lane west of Manning (bottom of hill) to tunnel. Look at safety improvements to reduce accidents bemeen Elsie and Quartz Creek Bridge. Also from viewpoint to Cannon Beach junction. Quartz Creek bridge - study earthquake proofing. Quartz Creek bridge - heating grid inlayed in pavement. Widen shoulders on two-lane areas of highway. Preserve/improve aesthetic qualities of highway corridor to enhance driving experience. May include preserving vegetation, selective trimming, new plantings. The trip's purpose is the journey as well as the destination. Create more pedestrian crossings over Highway 26. Emergency turn-around near Gordon Road/Highway 26 for emergency vehicles responding to accidents, etc. Improvements needed at Fisher Road, due to accidents, traffic. Needs turn lanes, passing lane. Provide non-emergency turn-arounds. Require large employers to develop transportation plans to relieve commuting traffic. Enforce speed limits on Highway 26 in Manning area. ~rectcongestion signs on Highway 26 above Staley's Junction. Encourage people to use Banks-Vernonia Linear Park for bikes rather than dangerous Highway 47. Widen to six lanes to Cornelius Pass Road. Construct on and off ramps at Gordon Road. Guess what happens when an eighteen wheeler wants to head to Portland when coming from newly (to be) annexed industrial property on West Union Road and they find themselves heading south on Jackson School Road. Confine growth to Metro UGB to reduceleliminate need to improve existing interchanges. Construct a rest area in conjunction with Banks-Vernonia Linear Park between Hwy 47 to Vernonia and Hwy 47 to Banks.
C. SITE-SPECIFIC ISSUES
Participants identified a number of site-specific priorities for the Corridor Plan. These are organized by the open house below.
Glencoe Road overpass needs widening and southside traffic light. Shute Road overpass elevation too high; visibility problem. Queque bypass lanes on US 26 ramps for buses. Overpass at Gordon Road Provide on/off of Gordon Road. Jackson School Road needs overpass with on/off ramps. (4) Two left exits dangerous off Hwy 26 at Banks. North Plains overpass too narrow - visibility poor and bad access to overpass. Jackson School Road is unsafe.
D. MISCELLANEOUS QUESTIONS
Flipcharts were randomly located to provide opportunities for input on the following questions:
1) What are the most important actions to be taken to improve bicycle and pedestrian transportation? 2) What are the most important actions to be taken to improve transit service? 3) What are the most important actions to be taken to improve freight movement (by truck, air or water)? 4) How should transportation system improvements be financed?
1. Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
Widen Glencoe Road with consistent bike lane from Sunset Highway to light rail (Hillsboro). Continue/expand bikers on buses program (connect North Plains to Tri-Met). Provide meamlability for pedestrians or bikers to cross highway safely. Make bicycle riders ride on roads with shoulders or pay registration fees.
2. Transit Service Improvements
Transit service from coast to Portland (on a regular basis). Tri-county metropolitan transportation district of Oregon Transit service from Sunset Highway (North Plains) to Westside light rail (Hillsboro). Bus service (with bike racks) from North Plains to Hillsboro light rail. The bus company (Tri-Met) needs to do its job, i.e., provide a better service.
3, Freight Movement Improvements
To improve Port of Astoria (and other industry) competitiveness, a truck (freight) lane, that will not impede other traffic, from coast to metro area is needed. Prevent land use encroachments upon airports. Improve transportation system's management. Freight on bus and light rail (during non-peak hours). Determine economic feasibilities of those freights you are considering to move.
4. Transportation System Improvement Financing
Bust the gas tax to finance non-highway improvements. Gas Tax - Bust locally; allow property tax such as Gas tax. Gas tax, licensing, tire tax, luxury tax and lottery revenues. Gas tax, licensing fees, tire excise tax, etc. - user fees. Make highway users pay for highways. Make sure development costs (fees) fund highway development necessitated by development. Increase fuel/weight mile taxes and license fees. Increased gas taxes. User fees. Sales tax (to general fund - not designated for transportation only) Capacity expansion requires local funding participation (15%- 25% - 50%). E. QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES
This section tabulates responses to a questionnaire included in an August 1996 newsletter requesting public input on key objectives from the draft Interim Corridor Strategy.
Number of completed questionnaires: 73
Disagree Highway capacity within the UGB 1. Limit expansion of Highway 26 within the 37 12 7 6 7 Metro urban growth boundary (UGB) to widening to six lanes between 1-405 and the UGB (Shute Road) and currently -programmed - interchange improvements (e.g., Sylvan and canyon ~oad). 2. In lieu of expanding Highway 26 capacity- 33 8 11 5 13 beyond thatindicated ~u&tion1; I implement Transportation Demand Managment strategies (e.g. carpooling, telecommuting), expand transit services, and increase reliance upon local streets for local trips. 3. Respond to traffic growth associated with 34 8 10 8 10 new development through light rail and other transit and through local street improvements, versus through expansion in ~ighwa~26 capacity. I 4. Develop dedicated HOV/carpool(3 or more 24 9 8
a portion of increased
streets. Highway capacity outside the UGB 6. Provide no expansion in highway capacity 34 10 5 6 14 outside the Metro UGB, except for climbing/ passing lanes and turning lanes or to address-safety-related needs. - 7. To provide for safe and efficient auto and 36 13 10 4 3 buSk operations in rural areas, investigate intersection improvements at Jackson School Road, Gordon Road, and Staley's Junction (US 26 and OR Hwy. 47). 8. Preserve rural sections of Highway 26 as 46 5 7 1 6 rural through concentrating services within rural community centers and restricting additional access points. Encouraging alternative transportation modes 9. Accommodate increased air freight and 17 18 13 2 18 commuter/corporate air service by improving facilities at existing public use airPoits, especially Hillsboro Auport, and through land use regulations that protect airports against land use encroachments. 10. Create a continuous bicycle route for the 34 13 8 5 9 length of the corridor by adding/improving bicycle lanes or widening shoulders as part of highway improvement projects. 11. Provide safe and convenient pedestrian 46 8 9 3 8 travel by providing sidewalks at interchanges and pedestrian comections on any new overpasses within the corridois
employment centers, housing and airports;
areas of high accident rates, and where
and Cornelius Pass Road within the corridor's urban portion; and to Highways 47,53, and 202 within the rural portion. Environmental and economic impacts 17. Design new improvements and retrofit 44 9 9 6 existing transportation facilities to encourage the conservation, restoration and protection of natural resources, particularly coastal salmon habitat 18. Design transportation system improvements 41 9 11 2 to preserve the livability of the communities within the corridor and to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts to sensitive cultural and other community resources. 19. Encourage transportation-efficient land use 45 8 10 2 2 patterns to reduce vehicle-miles traveled and to promote a live-work balance. 20. Promote the development of limited 22 17 17 5 6 additional developed recreational opportunities within the rural sections of the corridor to accommodate projected population growth.
What other objectives for long-term improvements to and management of transportation facilities within the corridor should be considered?
Highway- Capacitv
* What is the point in not permitting capacity increases outside the UGB? Do we want to wait until we have a situation like the one that occurred this summer on Highway 18 to Lincoln City? How does that serve the objective of supporting recreation and tourism economic development? If the capacity is not to be increased, is ODOT willing to finance hourly bus service to the coast with rent-a-car agencies or taxi service at each bus stop? If not, how will increased tourist and recreational trips be accommodated? If the objective is to avoid increasing capacity, what is the point in building additional lanes? The only function of passing lanes is to increase capacity. If the plan is to be useful and is to be consistent with Metro's plans to accommodate an additional half-million people in the metro area, it is essential to face up to the issue of managing substantially increased volumes of car trips on US 26 over the next 20 years. e Any cost-benefit for improvement to Jackson School Rd to increase access must include improving Mason Hill Rd. and Sollerger Rd. which will be impacted by cut through traffic. Explore ways to accommodate the rapid increase in urban commutes from Vernonia, Banks, North Plains, and other rural communities. Four lanes all the way to the coast. Overpass at Jackson School Road. Limit Highway 26 within metro boundary to existing road width-MAX is available for capacity growth. Improve Highway 53 as an alternate route for Highway 101 and 26. Keep speed limited to 55 mph on 26. No to new interchange at Glencoe Road - will only put pressure on UGB for residential expansion and will not help agricultural base of Washington Co. Develop a limited access highway down the west valley from Banks to Hwy. 22 west of Salem. Develop the Cornelius Pass Rd, either four-lane or passing lane areas. Get a Hwy. 26 to 1-5 bypass built without further delay. It seems as we improve local roads, we can move some traffic off Hwy. 26. Let's be sure it's a joint effort. Re question 7: there is no intersection at Gordon Rd. You promised an interchange at Jackson School Rd about 5 years ago, then completely ignored you promise. r A bypass of both Seaside and Astoria should be planned for as soon as possible. We have needed it for a long time and it has been discussed for years. The situation is becoming more and more dangerous for both residents and through traffic. Look at raised highways that put major thoroughfares (US26,15,1295,184) above the city and communities.
Alternative Modes
Improve mass transit - it's cheaper than widening roadways. The Port of Portland has adequate tax basis from property taxes and other revenue to do what is necessary to accomplish the intent of Question #9, i.e. who owns the land on the east runway approaches. Air transport should not expand at Hillsboro until a system of noise containment and responsible pilot operations can be developed. Otherwise, affected areas will be unlivable and property values will be seriously affected. Light rail and trolley systems will work. Make urban density livable with parks and open spaces and trees and access to rural areas (beach and Mts.). Talk about European train enjoyment. Extend light rail to Forest Grove. Explore transit options between Portland and Seaside/@annon Beach Emphasis should be on bus and rail systems. Limit development until mass transit is in place. Do not encourage automobile as primary transportation source. Do not build roads to encourage the automobile. Restrict airport gro emphasize rail. Stable intercity bus service on US 26 and/or US 30 serving c linking with national intercity services: Greyhound, Arntrak, etc. Improve north-south public transportation in Beaverton, Aloha and Hillsboro to light rail stations and to express Tri-Met bus stops. This will increase mass transit use and decrease reliance on automobile commuting. You folks are not realistic with regard to travel by car. They are with us and will remain with us. It's fine to urge alternative travel methods to a degree. But be realistic! HOV/carpool requirements of 2 persons. One of my major concerns is the lack of a bus service or commuter flight service in this area, so people have to drive everywhere they need to go in the UGB. The former Cornelius Pass line of Burlington Northern should be reopened for freight traffic. This route has fewer grade crossings than the line between Beaverton and Milwaukie. The route is more direct for freights. The rail bridge between Lake Oswego and MiIwaukie may see multiple daily passenger trains in the not distant future. Light rail and bus transit from outlying areas to downtown Portland must be designed to be faster than auto commuting. Highway 26 needs bus lanes on highway and on on-ramps. We need convenient transit access to Light Rail, making use of continuous public transit more convenient than driving cars to Light RaiI station. Use of existing heavy rail in Washington Co. should be seriously explored as a transportation alternative. Long term: A light rail line to Seaside instead of six lane blacktop. Restore or develop rail facilities to eliminate or at least reduce trucks on the highways. Keep bike paths separated from roads as far as possible to reduce the exhaust fumes of vehicles that pedestrians and bicyclists breathe. A bad example is the bike path on 1-84 between NE 122 Ave and NE 162 Ave.
Safetv/ Geometrv Improvements
North entrance from Hwy. 101 to Cannon Beach needs reworking for improved safety. Better lighting in tunnel for safety. Upgrade Highway 53 for safety as an alternate route for Highway 101. It would be desirable to buy out the few houses and lots downslope of the infamous' Elderberry slide. Put improved lighting in the Sunset Highway Tunnel. Need turn lane in Banks/Manning area on Hwy. 26. Too many accidents. At a minimum make the area a No Passing Zone from Hwy. 47 at east end through Manning. Guard rails and lights along Hwy 26; more freezing signs. Major improvements in traffic law edorcement are necessary today as well as long term.
Environmental/Economic Impacts
Do not cut tall trees that are next to the roadway. The view of tall trees as far as you can see is becoming rare. Any future development and changes in road must not destroy any tall trees next to the road. Preservation of farmland, rural character, visual aesthetics of roadway. It is not clear how transportation systems improvements can "save the salmon" Preserving agriculture near US 26 is a key factor is preserving west side livability. a Re Question 20: only if development does not proceed at the expense of farmland. Farmland must not be sacrificed for golf courses. Perhaps existing campgrounds/ trails could be improved. In Banks, for example, live-work an issue not well understood. Developers build homes/apts - not small business venues - How to minimize concept of "bedroom community" and accentuate concept of livable community. protect and enhance the corridor's scenic views, including the highway right of way itself. Retain the rare especially scenic areas where older conifers form a canopy over the highway. Use a photographer's eye to identify and enhance views that include the highway. Support ODOT's own landscape architects in increasing the number and high quality of roadside beautification sites. especially through attractive plantings of low maintenance native species as an alternative to vegetationless roadside strips. Work with county financially to improve rural roads affected by state highways. Due to highway accidents and construction, detour traffic floods these gravel roads, causing unsafe dusty conditions.
Other
I would like to encourage a return to the grid system. Is more efficient for pedestrian/bike use and less vehicle miles traveled. Also, no one street bears the brunt of all traffic. If there is an accident, go around the block. Please examine Calgary, Canada. They have an UGB and grid system, with no rush hour traffic backup even at peak times. Adjust ODOT rules and regulations to assist communities with inplementation of the Metro 2040 plan. Currently, ODOT's goals and Metro 2040 are not the same. Global exhaustion of oil within 25-30 years. Prepare no growth cost alternatives to predicted expenditures. Why were tolls, etc., ignored? Better coordination between rural and metro tram. system that dow for regional planning and interface of facilities in order to promote highest and best use of system abilities. State legislative mandates that require any r~ipientof public monies for transportation to use publicly funded transportation if available. It is clear that much praiseworthy, excellent and brave thought at the statewide level has gone into defining the corridor planning concept and its key themes. Appendix 5
TECHNICAL HPMSAP Level of Service (to be added at a later date) Access Management Highway Existing Conditions - Corridor Maps Highway Summary Potential Development Impact Areas ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
OVERVIEW OF HIGHWAY PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
Each State highway agency is required on an annual basis to collect and submit to the Federal Highway Admin- istration (FHWA) information on selected sections (samples) of highway from each functional system that is statistically representative at the statewide level. The collection, building, updating, and submittal of this sample database is known as the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS).
The Highway Performance Monitoring System Analytical Process (HPM'SAP) is a computer software package developed by FHWA to analyze the data in HPMS. The analysis provides an assessment of the physical condition, safety, service, and efficiency of operation of highway systems, and predicts the effects that pro- posed highway programs and policies are likely to have in the future on these highway systems. These results are used by FHWA for many purposes, including policy development and making biennial reports to the Con- gress on the status and performance of the nation's highways. HPMSAP has been made available to the States and other highway agencies as a highway planning tool that can be used in a number of statewide planning activities. Oregon has adapted HPMSAP for its own use since its development for such things as the Oregon Roads Finance Study and now, Corridor Planning.
C? The HPMSAP was designed to provide information on both present and future characteristics of a highway system under a variety of situations. The effects that proposed highway programs .may have on the future condition and performance of the highway systems can be tested by modifying certain parameters to create scenarios that simulate actual or proposed policies. For conidor planning, only some of the analyses available in the HPMSAP were used. Parameters and various options have been tailored to reflect Oregonis.experience. New databases were built containing a complete inventory for each of the conidors of itemsto'be used in conidor planning.
The purpose of this account is to give brief explanations of the data, analyses, parameters, values, and options used with the HPMSAP for corridor planning. For a complete explanation of the HPMSAP, see the HPMSAP documentation package available from FHWA consisting of the following:
Volume I - Executive Summary (Version 2.1) A brief overview of the capabilities of the HPMSAP.
Volume I1 - Technical Manual (Version 2.1) Contains the technical aspects of the package including the types of analysis done, the formulas used, and the values of various tables included in the programs such as minimum tolerable conditions, design standards, and improvement costs.
Volume Ill - User's Guide (Version 2.1) Contains the instructions for using the analytical I;rocess. This includes specifying which analyses are to be run, how to override default values, and how to specify funding for analysis periods. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
The HPMSAP requires input values for approximately 75 data elements in a stnrdured record format. Since not all of these elements are needed for wnidor planning, 'dummg values were input for these unneeded elements to satisfy the HPMSAP input requirements. The definitions of a few of the elements were changed to better satisfy the purpose and intent of corridor planning. Because of the long time-frame of wmdor planning and ODOT's priority to fund pavement maintenance and preservation projects, all pavement related data items were set to refled ideal or perfect pavement. This insured that results from the HPMSAP would not reflect pavement improvements.
The dataset for each corridor represents the entire length of that corridor and contains many records. An effort was made to insure that each record in the dataset represents a homogeneous section of highway.
Following is a list of those data elements used for wmdor planning: State Highway Number Beginning Milepoint e Section Length e County Region (added element - not required by HPMSAP) District (added element - not required by HPMSAP) Functional Classification (Definition changed) RuralIUrban Designation (Definition changed) Type of Facility Access Control Type of Development Urban Location % Passing Sight Distance e Speed Limit ADT e Future ADT Future ADT Year %Trucks K-Factor Directional Factor No. of Lanes Lane Width Shoulder Type and Width Median Type and Width Widening Feasibility Curves by Class Grades by Class Type of Terrain Parking ODOT Review Draft '6/95 - - --
Following is a list of items calculated by the software: Weighted Design Speed Horizontal Alignment Adequacy Vertical Alignment Adequacy Capacity (Rural sections only - must be input for urban sections) Volume / Service Flow Ratio (V/SF)
The RuraVUrban Designation definition was changed as follows: Code 1 - Rural: Unintempted flow with speeds > 35 mph. Capacities calculated by software. Code 2 - Urban: Intempted flow with speeds c 35 mph. capacities must be entered into dataset.
The Functional System definition was changed as follows: * Code 01 - Rural multi-lane facility with speeds > = 50 mph Code 02 - Rural 2-lane facility with speeds > = 50 mph Code 06 - Rural 'communitywfacility with speeds between 35 and 50 mph. Code 14 - Urban facility with speeds < 35 mph.
L. The sources used to obtain values for all items included ODOT's Integrated Transportation Information System (ITIS), traffic volume tables, straight-line charts, functional classification files, ODOT region offices, data from the Systems Studies Unit, and ODOT video-logs. The data was entered into the datasets in the spring and summer of 1993 and therefore may not reflect projects in the Six-Year Program and other improvements made between then and 1996.
HPMSAP ANALYSIS
For corridor planning, the HPMSAP was set to evaluate highway conditions in 1996 (the base year) and in 2016 (the future year). The information for the base year analysis is taken directly from the dataset. Future year analysis involves a number of steps and calculations with changes made to the dataset by the software. Both base year and future year analysis consist of a service index analysis (a measure of congestion levels) and impact analysis (average overall travel speed, vehicle operating costs, and fuel consumption).
The first step in future year analysis is to identify deficiencies. The analysis assumes that certain minimum tolerable conditions (MTC's) exist below which highway performance should not be allowed to fall. The MTCs used for corridor analysis are those identified in the 1991 Highway Plan (see below). If the characteristics of a particular highway section are below these MTC's in any respect, that section is considered deficient. Initially, a section is examined for deficiencies in the base year. If no deficiency is found, the process cycles year by year through the analysis period (in this case, 20 years) until a deficiency is found or until the end of the analysis period is reached. For each cycle in the analysis period, changes are made to the input record to simulate the changes expected to occur to the actual highway overtime. The two items changed by this process are average daily traffic (ADT) and pavement condition (PSR). The V/SF ratio is also recalculated based on the updated ADT. ODOT Review Draft - 6/95
After all deficiencies have been identified, the process selects improvements to correct these deficiencies and simulates the improvement by changing the values of relevant data items on the section record. The section values without improvement as well as the values with improvement are retained throughout the process allow- ing comparison of system conditions with and without the selected improvements at the end of the analysis period. The section capacity is recalculated when an improvement is simulated that would affect it. The cost of the improvement is added to the section record.
The following figure illustrates the HPMS analytical process. HPMS Analytical Process ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
Minimum Tolerable Conditions
The following MTC values represent the conditions below which Oregon does not wish to allow their highway system to fall. These values are the same as those in the 1991 Oregon Highway Plan for statewide significant highways. The MTC's have a great effect on the results produced by the HPMSAP.
MTCs FOR URBAN HIGHWAY SECTIONS
LANE WIDTH
Notes:
Terrain types are flat, roliing, and mountainous.
Sh'oulder Tvpe Codes Surface Type Codes 1. Surfaced 1. High Flexible 2. Stabilized 2. High Rigid 3. Earth 3. intermediate 4. Curbed 4. Low 5. Gravel
~orizont~l~erticaiAlionment Codes 1. All curveslgrades meet design standards 2. Some curveslgrades below design standards 3. Curveslgrades with reduced speed 4. Several curves unsafelsignificant reduction of speed on grades ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
Rural multi-lane, Zlane, and 'community" correspond with rural interstate, other principal arterials, and minor arterials in the MTC tables of the HPMSAP documentation. Urban corresponds with urban other principal arterial.
Desian Standards
When the model simulates an improvement, the design standard values are generally used to assign new condition values to the section record. For example, if lanes are widened by a simulated improvement, the design standard lane width is placed on the section record. Further analysis cycles consider the section as having a lane width meeting design standard. Section record data values already exceeding the design stan- dard remain as coded unless obliterated by an improvement. The following tables show the values of the design standards used by the HPMSAP for corridor planning. They are consistent with design standards used by ODOT and the Oregon Highway Plan.
DESIGN STANDARDS FOR RURAL HIGHWAY SECTIONS I MULTI -LANE I 2-L4NE I "COMMUNITY" ADT I AUADT I ADT > 5000 1 ADT < = 5000 1 ADT > 5000 1 ADT < = 5000
DESIGN S7'ANDARDS FOR URBAN HIGHWAY SECTIONS
Notes:
Terrain types are flat, rolling, and mountainous.
Surface Type Codes: 1. High Flexible 2. High Rigid 3. Intermediate 4. Low 5. Gravel
AVE HhY SPEED: Average highway speed is aefined as the weighted average design speed. ODOT Review Draft -- '6/95
Rural multi-lane, 2-lane, and 'communityn correspond with rural interstate, other principal arterials, and minor arterials in the MTC tables of the HPMSAP documentation. Urban -corresponds with urban other principal arterial.
Cycle Calculations
The HPMSAP is done on a cyclical basis for a one year cycle length. The analysis procedures are repeated in each highway section for each cycle. Changes are made in the input record to simulate changes expected to occur to the actual highway during each cycle. The two items changed by this process are average daily traffic (ADT) and pavement condition (PSR). The VISF ratio is also recalculated based on the updated ADT.
The ADT is coded on the HPMS section record for both the base year and a specified future year. The model uses these values in the formulas below to calculate the ADT for each cycle year within the analysis period:
Cycle ADT = ADT ' Growth Factor where:
ADT = ADT for previous cycle Growth Factor = (Future ADT / Base ADT) MP EXP = l/(Future Year - Base Year) Future Year = 2016 Base Year = 1996 Base Year and Future Year ADT calculated from a linear mgression analysis of 20 year traffic volume trends.
The equations used to simulate the deterioration of pavement inthe HPMSAP are based on modifr~ationsof the AASHTO Road Test equations. The rate of deterioration for both rigid and flexible pavements was reduced to account for the long-range nature of conidor planning and ODOT's policies which put priority on pavement maintenance and preservation. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
Identification of Deficiencies
The HPMSAP identifies deficiencies by comparing the values of the highway section data elements with the MTC's for these elements. If any of the values for the section do not meet the MTCs, the section is considered deficient. This process is continued cycle by cycle until a deficiency is identified or until the end of the analysis period is reached.
Four basic types of deficiencies are identified. They are deficiencies in volumelservice flow ratio (VISF ratio), lane width, pavement condition, and alignment. The improvements selected by the model later in the analysis are based on these deficiencies. Other deficiencies may eMcist and may be corrected .by certain types of im- provements but they do not control the type of improvements selected.
The VISF ratio is used to determine whether a ca~acit~-rela%3ddeficiency is identified. The cycle year VISF ratio is compared to the MTC. If the VISF ratio is greater than the MTC, a capacity deficiency is identified.
If the highway section lane width is less than the MTC, a lane width deficiency is identified.
To check for pavement deficiencies the PSR is compared with the MTC. If the PSR is lower than the MTC, a pavement deficiency is identified. As was mentioned above, the effect of pavement deficiencies was reduced in the modeling process to account for the long-range nature of conidor planning and ODOT's pavement pres ervation policies. This was done by initially coding PSR's as excellent (5.0) for all sections of highway and reducing deterioration rates.
In rural sections, if either the horizontal or vertical alignment is below the respective ,MTCs, and if any other deficiency exists, an alianment deficiency is identified.
After all deficiencies have been identified, the model selects improvements to correct these deficiencies. The types of improvements selected are based on the area (rural or uhan), the type of highway, and the types of deficiencies that have been identified. The HPMSAP considers three major categories of improvements - reconstruction, widening, and resurfacing. The construction of new facilities in new locations is not addressed because inadequate information is available on the nature of those improvements (location, length, etc.). For corridor planning (assuming pavement deficiencies do not exist and widening is not constrained), the following improvement types are simulated:
Reconstruction with More Lanes - selected when additional lanes are needed and the alignment is deficient.
Reconstnrction to Wider Lanes - selected when the alignment is deficient and either the lane width is less than the design standard width or the right shoulder width is less than the MTC.
Maior Wideninq - selected when additional lanes are needed.
Minor Widenina - selected when either the lane width is less than the design standard width or the right shoulder width is less than the MTC. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
Once a specific improvement type has been selected, it is then simulated by the HPMSAP. The simulation changes the values of certain data items on the section record. For example, when minor widening is simu- lated, the lane width and right shoulder width are changed to the design standard widths and the shoulder type *. is upgraded to the MTC since there is no design standard for shoulder type. The peak hour capacity and WSF ratio are recalculated. The section values without improvement as well as the values with improvement are retained throughout the analytical process allowing comparison of system conditions with and without the se- lected improvements at the end of the analysis period. lrn~rovementCosts
In the simulation process, construction and right-of-way costs are estimated for each type of improvement. The costs used for conidor planning by the HPMSAP are the same as those used by the 1993 Oregon Roads Finance Study. They are average costs differentiated by improvement type and byterrain. The following tables show the costs used for only those improvement types expected to be simulated by the process.
RURAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS Per Lane-Mile ($000'~)
RURAL RIGHT-OR-WAY COSTS - Per Lane-Mile ($000'~)
Notes: For all improvement type costs, multiply costs / lane-mile by total number of lanes after the improvement. Terrain types are flat, rolling, and mountainous. ODOT Review Draft - 6/95
URBAN CONSTRUCTION COSTS Per Lane-Mile ($000'~) IMPROVEMENT TYPE BUILT-UP OUTLYING I Reconstruct wlmore lanes 1220 793 Reconstruct w/wider lanes 833 541 Major Widening (add lanes) 2147 1396 Minor Widenina 473 402
URBAN RIGHT-OF-WAY COSTS Per Lane-Mile ($000'~)
Notes: For major widening only (adding lanes) costs are per added lane-mile. For all other improvement types, multiply costs 1 lane-mile by total number of lanes after - improvement.
The procedures used to calculate mral capacities are adapted from the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The capacrty calculations are based on service flow rates for level of service E. The proce- dures for general terrain are used. For 3-lane highways, an adaptatidh of 2-lane procedures is used.
Special methods were developed to calculate urban capaaty using theHPMSAP. Thesoftware cannot accurately evaluate capacity by itself because it does not consider local conditions such as turning movements, bus stops, parking maneuvers and pedestrians. Initial urban capacities were calculated using existing urban models or by procedures in the HCM where models were not available. Where an improvement is simulated, the software upgrades the initial capacity using factors that were developed for this purpose from procedures in the HCM. ODOT Review Draft -- ,6195
Service index Analvsis
The HPMSAP rates the conditions of highway sections using a composite index of factors related to highway condition, safety and service. A value of 100 represents a perfect highway section in new condition that meets '. all applicable design standards. A value of zero represents a section that is far below minimum tolerable conditions (MTC's) and is so badly deteriorated that it is unusable. Values for actual highway sections lie somewhere between these extremes, with the better sections having values higher than the poorer sections.
The composite index is the sum of component indexes for condition, safety, and service. The relative weight of each of these three components are determined by the user. For conidor planning, a weight of 0 was assigned to condition because pavement condition is not an issue. Safety was assigned a weight of 60 and service a weight of 40.
The individual component indexes were computed from the following section record data items:
Condition Pavement Type Pavement Condition Drainage Adequacy Safety Lane Width Shoulder Width Median Width Alignment Adequacy Service LfISF Ratio
Appraisal rates were assigned to each data item value used in determining the composite index. These sates range from 1.00 to 0.00. A rate of 1.00 is used if the data item is perfect or in new condition. A rate of 0.00 is used if the item represents a useless condition. The software uses a table to correlate the section record data values with the appraisal rates.
Each data item is also weighted. The appraisal rate for an item times the weight yields a point value for the item. Component indices are calculated by point values for all items that make up the component. The values of the three component indices are then added to determine the composite index.
The value for one highway section is agg~egatedwith the values (weighted by miles or by travel) for other sections in the corridor to determine the composite and component indexes for that conidor. ..These index values are calculated for the base year and for the target year both with and without the simulated improve- ments. ODOT Review Draft - 6/95
Following is a table showing the appraisal rates related to various VISF ratios and to Level of Service (LOS) for rural and urban highway sections.
MCTs FOR RURAL HIGHWAY SECTIONS Rural Multi-lane LOS I VISF 1 Appraisal 1 VISF 1 Appraisal 1 VISF I Appraisal Rate Rate Rate A 0.00-0.1 9 40 0.00-0.1 9 40 0.00-0.40 40 B 0.20-0.49 32 0.20-0.39 24 0.41-0.60 32 C 0.50-0.64 .24 0.20-0.39 24 0.61-0.70 24 D 0.65-0.79 16 0.40-0.64 16 0.71-0.85 16 E 0.80-0.95 8 0.65-0.95 8 0.86-0.95 8 F > = 0.96 1 0 > = 0.96 0 > = 0.96 0
Examples:
Rural multi-lane section with VlSF = 0.1 5. Points = 40. LOS = A
Rural 2-lane section with V/SF = 0.80. Points = 8. LOS = E
Urban sedion with VISF = 0.63. Points = 24. LOS = C.
Priority Ranking
The HPMSAP enables priority rankings for improvements to be made, Four ranking systems are available. The procedure used for conidor planning ranks improvements by a cost-effectiveness index (CEI). This index is based on an equation that considers the benefrts of the improvement, in terms of the composite index and the travel on the facility, relative to the improvement cost. The equation is:
CEI = (IMPCI - UNPCI) * IMPYADT * SECTION LENGTH I COST OF IMPROVEMENT
Where:
CEI = the cost effectiveness index IMPCl = the composite index of the improved section at the end of the analysis period UNPCI = the composite index of the unimproved section at the end of the analysis period : IMPYADT = the ADT in the improvement year SECTION LENGTH = the coded length of the section COST OF IMPROVEMENT = the construction and right-of-way cost of the improvement
This equation uses the difference in the composite indices of the section at the end of the analysis period, with and without improvement, as a measure of the benefit to the section. This benefit is applied to the travel on the section as measured by the ADT and the section length to determine the overall effectiveness of the selected improvement. This value is then divided by the cost of the improvement to determine the cost effectiveness tndex. The CEI ranking is in descending order - a high CEI value results in a high place in the ranking scheme. ODOT Review DraR -- 6/95
lmoact Analvsis
The purpose of the impact analysis is to provide for comparison of vehicle performance measures under vari- ous scenarios. These comparisons can be made among the target years for several scenarios or between a 's base year and a target year for a particular scenario. The vehicle performance measures used in corridor planning analysis are average overall travel speed (used to calculate travel time), operating costs, and fuel consumption. These vehicle performance measures are estimated by analyzing each highway section and aggregating the results to represent each functional system. Each vehicle type is 'driven" by simulation over the highway section to determine the performance measures for that particular vehicle type on that section.
The simulated vehicle operation is affected by a number of factors including horizontal and vertical alignment, pavement condition, and traffic congestion. Vehicle operation is simulated at several different levels of traffic congestion as it varies throughout the day. This is more realistic than using a single VISF ratio to represent the daily cycle of traffic flow conditions. Vehicle fleet characteristics are held constant over the analysis period. The characteristics affecting speed, fuel consumption, and operating costs are not varied over time.
Traffic Volume Distribution. Rather than select a peak hour or average condition for determining the effects of traffic congestion, the model divides the 24-hour day into several discrete time periods, with each having a different level of congestion. ,Vehicle operation is simulated independently for each of these periods to reflect the different degrees of wngestion that occur during the day. A maximum of 12 different time periods or congestion levels is used, based on the ADTIcapacity ratio and the facility type. The ADTIcapacity ratio is a measure of the range of congestion levels that occur on a facility. A low ratio indicates that a large portion of the travel on that particular facility occurs during periods of low congestion, while for a facility with a high ratio, the reverse is true.
Vehicle Twe Distribution. The impact analysis is performed for seven vehicle types: e small automobile (less than 3,000 Ib.) large automobile (equal to or greater than 3,000 Ib.) pickups and vans e truck, single unit, two-axle, six-tire truck, single unit, three-axle or more truck, combination, four-axle or less truck, combination, five-axle or more
Each type of vehicle has different vehicle performance values. Therefore, to aggregate the performance mea- sures for several vehicle types, it is necessary to know the vehicle type distribution for each functional system. This model uses data obtained through the HPMS Vehicle Classification Case Study. The vehicle distribution is divided into two basic categories, tnrcks and non trucks, which is determined by the percentage of trucks for each highway section. The number of vehicles indicated by the percent trucks (percent trucks times ADT) is prorated among the various truck types listed above. The remainder of the vehicles are prorated among the three lighter iehicle types. In this analysis, the term "truck" refers to the four heaviest vehicle types. ODOT Review Draft - 6/95
Averaae Overall Travel Soeed. The first speed value determined by the impact model is called the initial running speed. This speed is based on the speed limit, congestion level, development type, number of lanes, average highway speed, and passing sight distance. This initial running speed represents an aggregation of the cruise modes of the vehicle. It does not include the accelerations, decelerations, or stops; these are added later. A separate initial running speed is determined for each of the congestion levels to be analyzed for the highway section.
After the initial running speeds have been determined for each congestion level, the speeds are modified to reflect the effect of pavement condition.
Horizontal alignment affects the average overall travel speed if the curvature is restrictively sharp. In this model, a table of safe speeds is used to limit the speed of all vehicle types. The speed restrictions contained in this table are applied to each curve category, for the length of curvature recorded in the section record.
This model assumes that the average overall travel speeds of passenger cars, pickups, and vans are not significantly affected by grades, but the speeds of trucks are affected. As a truck ascends a positive grade, it gradually slows to a constant speed called the crawl speed. The model calculates the speeds of trucks on grades using table values assuming a linear decrease in speed. It also assumes that truck speeds increase on negative grades at the same rate that they decrease on upgrades.
The speed is further modified to reflect delays caused by traffic congestion and by the type of facility. These effects are simulated by means of applying adjustments representing speed change cycles, stop cycles, and idling time. The impact model calculates the time consumed by speed change cycles and stop cycles using equations from the 'Highway Investment Analysis Package" for seven facility types. Like the speed change cycles, idling factors are stratified by seven facility types and tables are used containing these factors.
The following figure illustrates the sequence used in calculating average overall travel speed. SEQUENCE USED IN GALCULATING AVERAGE OVERALL TRAVEL SPEED
INITIAL SPEED
SPEED ADJUSTED FOR+ PAVEMENT CONOKlON
SPEED ADJUSTED FOR CURVES
SPEED ADJUSTED FOR GRADES (TRUCKS ONLY) f SPEED ADJUSTED FOR SPEED CHANGE AND STOP CYCLE EFFECTS
SPEED ADJUSTED FOR IDLING TIME -
AVERAGE OVERALL TRAVEL SPEED ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
Vehicle O~eratinaCosts and Fuel Consum~tion.Both vehicle operating costs and fuel consumption are deter- mined in the same way, by using tables of values for each. Operating costs include the costs of fuel, lubricating oil, tires, maintenance and repairs, and use-related depreciation. Initial values are obtained based on speed and grade, and adjustments are made for the effects of curves, speed change and stop cycles, pavement condition, and idling time. The speed used to enter these tables is the initial running speed adjusted for curva- ture and pavement condition. Additional procedures are applied for trucks that are slowed by grades.
The following figure illustrates the sequence used in calculating vehicle operating costs and fuel consumption.
SEQUENCE USED IN CALCULATING VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION
COSTS AND FUEL BASED ON GRADE
COSTS AND FUEL ADJUSED K>R EFFEtfS W CURVES
COSTS AND FUEL ADJUSTED FOR SPEED CHANGE AND STOP CYCLE EFFECTS
COSTS AND FUEL ADJUSTEDe+FOR PAVEMENT CONDmON
COSTS AND FUEL ADJUSTED- FOR IDLING TlUE
FINAL VALUES FOR VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS AND FUEL CONSUMmlON ODOT Review Draft - 6/95
OUTPUT
The HPMSAP produces much information in the form of summary tables. Only a few of these were used for comdor planning and are described below.
Conaestion
The composite index analysis - specifically the component service (VlSF ratio) index - provides a means of measuring congestion for the base year and for the future year with and without improvements. Following is an example of what this summary table looks like and how this information is translated into congestion levels for use in conidor planning.
In HPMSAP output tables, tnese headings appear as Interstate, Principal Arterial, and Minor Arterial, respectively. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
It can be seen from this table that forthe multi-lane sections of this example corridor, 11.4% of the mileage is at LOS E or F (high congestion). 6.8% of the mileage is at LOS D (moderate congestion) and the rest of the mileage is at LOS A, B, or C (low congestion). For the 2-lane sections of the corridor, 33.4% of the mileage is highly congested, 41.3% of the mileage is moderately congested, and 25.4% of the mileage has low conges- tion. For Y~~mm~nity'sections, 87.5% of the mileage has high congestion and 12.5% of the mileage has moderate congestion. For all sections, the total rural congestion levels in this example would be 28.7% high congestion, 26.1% moderate congestion, and 45.2% low congestion. Urban congestion levels would be aggre- gated with these results to obtain the total congestion levels for the base year.
HPMSAP lmoact Analysis - The HPMSAP impact analysis provides several measures of car and truck performance including highway speed (travel time), operating costs, and fuel consumption, for the base year and for the future year with and without improvements. Following is an example of a summary table and how the information in it is translated into performance measures for use in conidor planning.
INVESTMENTIPERFORMANCE IMPACT ANALYSIS BASE YEAR CONDITIONS ALL AUTOMOBILES, PICKUPS AND VANS HIGHWAY SECTION I AVG. OVERALL I OPERATING I FUEL 1 TYPE TRAVEL SPEED 'COST CONSUMPTION (mph) - (dollar- (gallons?
Notes: * Per 1,000 vehicle miles * In HPMSAP output tables, these headings appear as Interstate, Principal Arterial, and Minor Arterial, respectively. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
Assume the following mileage's and DVMT's (daily vehicle miles traveled): -Miles DVMT (OOO1s] Multi-Lane 5 125 2-Lane 25 250 "Community" 3 45 Urban 2 80
Travel times: Multi-Lane = 5/51.7*60 = 5.8 minutes
2-Lane = 25 146.4 60 = 32.3 minutes
"Community" = 3 1 38.7 60 = 4.7 minutes
Urban = 2118.7*60 = 6.4 minutes
Total travel time for the conidor = 5.8 + 32.3 + 4.7 + 6.4 = 49.2 minutes
Since the operating costs shown in the HPMSAP table do not include the cost of time, this is now added to the results at a rate of $1 0.00 Ihour for automobiles, pickups and vans. (Source: Highway Economic Requirements System as cited in National Highway Institute Course # 15257, Estimating the Impacts of Transportation Alter- natives.)
Cost of Time in $ !1900 vehicle miles: Multi-lane = 10 * 5.8 160 * 125/5 = $24.2
"Community" = 10 * 4.7 / 60 * 45 / 3 = $11.8
Urban = lo* 6.4/60* 8012 = $42.7
The total automobile non-truck operating cost in $1 1000 vehicle miles for this comdor would be:
The total non-truck fuel consumption in gallons / 1000 vehicle miles for this corridor would be: -.
(112.0 * 125 + 96.2 * 250 + 89.4 * 45 + 94.9 80) / (125 + 250 + 45 + 80) = 99.3
Truck operating costs and fuel consumption would be aggregated with these results to obtain comdor totals for the oase year. The hourly raie ior tni: value of truck time usecr in the calculations was $26.50. This rate was ODOT Review DraR -- 6/95
computed from an average value of time for different classes of trucks (from the source cited above) weighted by the percentage of trucks in different classes calculated by averaging percentages at sixteen automatic traffic recorder sites from around the state.
- Cost Effectiveness of Reducina Conaestion and Savina Travel Tme
To estimate the cost effectiveness of reducing congestion and saving travel time the HPMSAP investment summary table and the HPMSAP section ranking list are used. Following is an example of the HPMSAP output information and it is used for conidor planning. Please note that the actual HPMSAP section ranking table would contain many more columns of information. Only those columns used in conidor planning are shown for this example.
SECTION RANKING FOR INVESTMENT DOLLARS RURAL 2-MNE' HIGHWAY EXAMPLE SECTION SECTION COST CUMULATIVE ID LENGTH COST (miles) ($000~) ($000~) 009990019300 0.3 989 989 1 009990030000 0.4 1319 2308 2 009990002500 1.I 2922 5230 3 009990100600 0.8 965 6195 4 In the HPMSAP table this heading appearsas Principal Arterial. The ather functional systems - mutti-lane (wal inkstate), "mw(nnal minor arterial),and urban (urban other principal arterial) - haw their orm section ranking kt
The first 5 digits of the ID are the highway number. The last? digits are the beginning milepoint of the section in thousandths of a mile. For example, the first section in the example is on highway 999 and begins at milepoint 19.3.
The cost is the cost of the simulated improvement. If no money is available the improvement will not be simulated. If only limited money is available, improvements will be simulated according to the ranking of the sections until all funding is used. A section with a ranking of 1 will be improved before a section with a ranking of 4. The ranking used for corridor planning is the cost effectiveness index. All sections would be improved if unlimited funding was available. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
The following tables show what the service index (i.e., congestion) and the average speed (travel time) for each functional class would be with no funding and with funding only to improve the top ranked 2-lane section ($989,000 -see the table above titled Section Rankina For lnvestment Dollars). These results are aggregated to obtain a congestion level and travel time for the comdor as a whole.
INVESTMENT SUMMARY BY FUNCTIONAL CLASS 1 ANALYSIS PERIOD: 1997 - 2016 NO IMPROVEMENTS
INVESTMENT SUMMARY BY FUNCTIONAL CLASS 1 ANALYSIS PERIOD: 1997 - 2016 TOP-RANKED IMPROVEMENT
NOTES: 1. The actual HPMSAP lnvestment Summary tables contain many more columns of information. Only those columns used in comdor planning are shown for this example. 2. In the HPMSAP table these heading appear as Interstate, Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, and Other Principal Arterial, respectively.
The improvements to this section have decreased congestion on 2-lane sections by 1.8 points (27.1 - 25.3) and increased speed by 2.1 mph (49.5 - 47.4). By making funding available to also improve the next ranked 2-lane section ($2,308,000 - see the table above titled Section Ranking For Investment Dollars), the Investment Summary table would again show changes in service and speed. This process is continued until all sections for all functiona! c!asset needing irnprovern~ritf;vo been funded. In this v:,y it can be seen how im?:o:rements to a section of road have an impact on the overall congestion and travel time of a corridor. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
SCENARIOS
Various scenarios were used for wnidor planning to analyze highway performance using the HPMSAP. 1996 was chosen as the base year to coordinate the corridor analysis with the development of local transportation system plans which are to be completed by 1996. The 1996 base scenario considers the condition of the , highway as it existed in 1992 and traffic levels projected for 1996. Improvements identified in the State Trans- portation lmprovement Program but not yet built were not included in the base scenario analysis because of uncertainties in knowing the full nature of these improvements and which might be completed by 1996. The planning horizon, 2016, was established 20 years later than the base year. The future year scenarios combine several improvement and management levels. The purpose of the scenarios is to give people an understanding of a range of possible futures and their effects on highway performance.
Five types of improvement scenarios were modeled which illustrate ranges in performance possible for the conidor given present traffic growth rates.
1996 (Base Year) 0 2016 lmprovement Case 1 - Simulates eliminating all geometric deficiencies (curves, widths, grades) by the future year. 2016 lmprovement Case 2 - Simulates eliminating all capacity deficiencies by the future year. 2016 lmprovement Case 3 (2016 Build) - Simulates a combination of Cases 1and 2 -All geometric and L- capacity deficiencies are eliminated.
Two management options were simulated for the 2016 no-improvement scenario and for the 2016 improvement case 3 scenario to estimate the possible effects of future land development on performance. The ITlSdatabase identifies city limits, urban growth boundaries and the general character of the roadside environment (urban, community, rural). The high management alternative assumes that despite changes in land use, the general operating characteristics of the highway will not change. This might be accomplished through judicious land use planning, local road construction and access management. The low management scenario assumes that changes in highway operating characteristicswill change as a result of future changes in land use. Specifically, it is assumed that urban fringe areas within urban growth boundaries would become urban in character and that lower speed zones would be imposed in these areas for safety purposes (45 mph and 40 rnph speed zones would be reduced to 30 mph and 25 mph respectively).
While it is highly unlikely that any of these cases would be realized, the results can be used as a starting point in defining comdor strategy because they define a range of potential effeds.
1996 (Existina) and 2016 No lm~rovements(No Build)
These scenarios use as input the dataset built with existing, available information -the 'original" dataset - and zero funding. The output is base year (1 996) performance measures and future year (2016) performance measures with no improvements simulated. ODOT Review Draft -- 6/95
lm~rovementCase 1 (Geometric Im~rovements)
Another dataset is built from the 'original" dataset with changes made to correct geometric deficiencies. If shoulder widths or lane widths are below the MTC, they are changed to the design standard. If horizontal alignment adequacy is below the MTC, straightening of the deficient curves is simulated. If vertical alignment adequacy is below the MTC, another lane is added to simulate a climbing lane. All values are.recalculated in the dataset.
This new dataset is input to the HPMSAP along with zero funding. The output is future year (2016) performance measures with no improvements simulated by the HPMSAP. lm~rovementCase 2 (Caoacitv Imorovements~
This scenario uses as input the 'originaln dataset and unlimited funding. The output is future year (2016) performance measures with all improvements simulated by the HPMSAP funded. lmorovement Case 3 (Geometric and Ca~ac-tvIm~rovements)
Another dataset is built from the 'original" dataset with-changes made to correct geometric deficiencies on sections that were not capacity deficient as identified in Case 2. All values were recalculated. This new dataset is input to the HPMSAP along with unlimited funding. The output is future year (2016) performance measures with all improvements simulated. ,
Cost Effectiveness
To determine the cost effectiveness of reducing congestion or decreasing travel time, the HPMSAP must be run a number of times. Each time the amount of funding available is changed, This varied funding along with the "original* dataset is used as input to the HPMSAP. The output is future year (2016) peFfomance measures with only those improvements simulated that have funding. 1991 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN a
v, TABLE 1 HIGHWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT i CATEGORIES
where financial and social costs of attaining full Category 1: access control would substantially exceed benefits. These highway segments provide for efficient This category includes some of the statewide and safe high speed and high volume traffic facilities. movements, on interstate, interregional, intercity, and some intracity routes in the largest urbanized areas. The segments do not Category 4: provide direct land access. Access control and These highway segments provide for efficient other methods will be used on nearby cross and safe medium to high speed and medium to streets in the area of interchanges to protect the high volume traffic movements, on .higher operation of those interchanges. This category function interregional and intercity highway will apply to all interstate highways and other segments. They also may carry significant highways that function like freeways. volumes of longer distance intracity trips. They are appropriate for routes passing through areas which have moderate dependence on the Category 2: highway to serve land access and where the These highway segments provide for efficient and financial and social costs of attaining full access safe high speed and high volume traffic control would substantially exceed benefits. movements, on interstate, interregional, intercity This category includes a small part of the state- and longer distance intracity routes. They should wide facilities and most regional facilities. not provide direct land access. This category is distinguished by highly controlled connections, and medians. Traffic signals shou!d be avoided Category 5: and where they must be installed, their effect on These highway segments provide for efficient and mainline traffic flow should be minimized. Grade safe medium speed and medium to high-volume separations should be considered for high volume traffic movements, on intercity, intracity and inrer- cross streets or other cases where signals are not community routes. There is a reasonable balance appropriate. Some category 2 facilities may be between direct access and mobility needs within thls developed into category 1 facilities over time. category. This category includes many of the statewide facilities. - Category 6: These highway segments provide for efficient and Category 3: safe slower to medium speed and low to high- These highway segments provide for efficient and volume traffic movements, on intracity and inter- safe medium to high speed and medium to high community routes. This category will be assigned volume MICmovements, on interregional, intercity only where there is little value in providing for high and longer distance intracity routes. The segments speed travel. Providing for reasonable and safe are appropriate for areas which have some access to abutting propexty is a major purpose of this dependence on the highway to serve land access and access category. 1991 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN
v ACCESS MANAGEMENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Intersection Access Urban1 Public Road Private Drive (3) Signal Median Category Treatment LO1 (1) Rural Type (2) Spacing Type Spacing Spacing (4) Control Full Control Interstatel U 1 Interchange 23 Mi. None NA None Full (Freeway) Statewide R Interchange 3-8 Mi. None NA None Full Full Control U 112-2 Mi. NA 2 Statewide At gradellntch None 112-2 Mi. Full (Expressway) R At gradellntch 1-5 Mi. None NA None (5) Full Limited Control 3 Statewide U At gradejlntch f 12-1 Mi. Rt. Turns 800' 112-1 Mi. Partial (Expressway) R At gradenntch 1-3'MI. Fit. Turns 1200' None (5) Partial (6) Statewide/ 4 Limited Control U At gradellntch 114 Mi. Lt./Rt. Turns 500' 112 Mi. PartialJNone (7) Regional R At gradellntch 1 Mi. Lt.lRt. Turns 1200' Ncne (5) PartiallNone (7) Regional/ U 1I4 Mi. 300' None 5 Partial Control At grade Lt./Rt Turns 1I4 Mi. District R At grade 112 Mi. U.Pt Turns 500' 112 Mi. N6ne U At grade 500' Turns 150' None 6 PartialControl District Lt./Rt 114 Mi. R At grade I 114 Mi. Lt./Rt. Turns 300' 1/2 Mi. None Notes:
1) The Level of Importance (LOI) to those shown to optimize capacity and which the Access Category will gener- safety. ally correspond. In cases where the access category is higher than the 4) Generally, signals should be spaced to Level of Importance calls 'for, existing minimize delay and disruptions to levels of access control will not be through traffic. Signals may be spaced reduced. at intervals closer than those shown to optimize capacity and safety. 2) The basic intersection design options are as listed. Special treatments may 5) In some instances, signals may need to be mnsiQered in other than category be installed. Prior to deciding on a 1. These include partial interchanges, signal, other alternatives should be jughandles, eec. The decision on examined. The design should minimize design should be based on function of the effect of the signal on through the highway, traffic engineering, cost- traffic by establishing spacing to effectiveness and need to protect the optimize progression. Long-range highway. Interchanges must conform plans for the facility should be to the interchange policy. directed at ways to eliminate the need for the signal in the future. 3) Generally, no signals will be allowed at private access points on statewide 6) Partial median control will allow some and regional highways. If warrants are well-defined and channelized breaks in met, alternatives to signals should be the physical median barrier. These can be investigated, including median allowed between intersections if no dete- closing. Spacing between private rioration of highway operation will result. access points is to be determined by acceleration needs to achieve 70 7) Use of physical median barrier can be percent of facility operating speed. interspersed with segments of Allowed moves and spacing requir- continuous left-turn lane or, if demand ments may be more restrictive than is light, no median at all. MECmICUM XX. UP,L.42
LANES BY DIRECT ---- I SHOULDERS s 1 Category "A,"-..-- rnvcMCn I I I CONDITION I 1 1 i 1 I
STRUCNRE I CONOmON ACCIDENT LOCATlONS1 -* : a X gZ;;4$ " E or ~1 m n - U~P ~1mN in ~m -NV N Z?$G: $ N m -a 0 ~d&d & 22 u? 7 .! 0 7- y.7, .l mq zyr\! L" TC: TPvV :v v w 19 LD?-&P-' CC- ChC ; oi hdo; o; vv -7-vv v VT*TT.. vg?2 TVP v 2 g gg - - M B
ST XT. WHlNa 8AWE9 M.P. 46.48 M.P. 47.46 kP.4a.3.e
Hew. NB. 49 urtmw.Na.1m
MP.4S.48 . . tn. MP.. . . 49.- .-91 .
LANES BY DlRECTl
LNEL OF SEKWCE Access Management Category Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan US Highway 26
file xsunset.xls Draft 1 sheet 2 9/22/97 Access Management Category Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan US Highway 26
file xsunset.xls Draft 2 sheet 2 9/22/97 Access Management Category Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan US Highway 26
file xsunset.xls Draft sheet 2 Access Management Category Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Plan US Highway 26
file xsunset.xls Draft sheet 2 DRAFT REPORT #2 Corridor Planning-Transportation System Inventory Region 1 - Rural Highway Inventory
HIGHWAY SUMMARY
Facility: US 26 - Sunset Highway (#47)
General Description: US 26, the Sunset Highway (#47), begins at the junction with US 101, the Oregon Coast Highway north of the city of Cannon Beach and continues to the junction of OR 99W, the Pacific Highway West 1W, in Portland. US 26 is a major east-west route to the Oregon Coast and is part of the National Highway System. The highway section addressed in this smarycovers the ma1 section from the Cannon Beach Junction (M.P. 0.00) to North Plains city limits at M.P. 56.24. US 26, for this inventory, is divided into six segments as described in Table 1.
Page 1 Region 1 -- Rural Highway Inventory US 26, Sunset Highway (#47) Draft Report #2 - February 26,1997
Table 1 -- Highway Segments
Current Functional Classification: ODOT/Federal Functional Classification: Principle Arterial Regional TSP Functional Classification: NA County TSP Functional Classification: Regional Arterial-Freeway Clatsop County: M.P. 0.00 to 30.75 Tillarnook County: M.P. 30.75 to 34.16 Washington County: M.P. 34.16 to 34.45 and 35.26 to 56.24 Columbia County: M.P. 34.35 to 35.26 City TSP Functional Classification: NA Oregon Highway of National Significance(0HNS): Preferred
Alternate Routes: US 30, the Lower Columbia Highway (#2W) to the north and OR 6, the Wilson River Highway (#37) to the south are alternate routes to the Oregon coast. Page 2 Region 1 -- Rural Highway Inventory US 26, Sunset Highway (#47) Draft Report #2 - February 26,1997
Comprehensive Plan Designation (August 9) Exclusive Forest and Conservation (EFU); west of North Plains, U-xing at Dersham Road, Rural Industrial (R-Ind)
Description: The Sunset Highway # 47 (US 26) is a 2 lane highway with 12' and 14' travel lanes and right shoulder widths varying from 4' to 10'. A 4 lane divided highway staPts at M.P. 53.1 and continues east. There are left turn lanes at M.P. 52.62 ( Banks Road, Harrison Road). No traffic signals exist within ths section of highway.
Historical Traffic Volume Growth Rate: Over 2.5 percent per year.
Public Transportation: None
Bicycle Facilities: None, however the shoulders in this segment are 4' or greater and can be used for bicycles.
Programmed Improvements: None
COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS
A study should be made in the North Plains area, due to proposed changes in land use and the urban growth boundary. This study should include the Dersham Road under crossing area, where the land use is Rural Industrial (R-Ind).
- - Page 11 IONS GEND
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION - INTERSTATE PRINCIPAL ARTERlAL ----* MINOR ARTERIAL PAVEMENT CONDITIONS "lll.lll .-,. URBAN COLLECTOR 1 RURAL MAJOR COLLECTOR . -- VERY GOOD FUNCTIONALLY CLASSED - ---"--- ROAD WlTHIN FEDERAL GOOD AID URBAN BOUNDARY --- -.---.-_--_ FA1 R MINOR COLLECTOR - POOR LOCAL - VERY POOR
# OF LANES LEVEL OF SERVICE m...... m...... , "C" OR BElTER ---.. "DM "En- "F
STRUCTURE CONDITION
SD = STRUCTURBLLY DEFICIENT FO = FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE CENTER LANE INFO. ND = NOT DEFICIENT NA = NOT APPLICABLE LEFT TURN LANE
- -& CONTINUOUS LEFT TURN LANE PAINTED MEDIAN ACCIDENT LOCATIONS BY MILEPOINT (1992-94) -ill- NON-TRAVERSABLE MEDIAN e ACCIDENTS -DOES NOT APPLY- A SPlS SITES TOP 10% 1992-94
PAVED ADT (1993) SHOULDER WlDTHS SIDEWALKS ...... , 0- 1,499 OVER 6' OVER 6' - 1,500 - 2,999 - - 3,000 - 4,999 4' - 6' 4' - 6' m- m- 5,000 - 9,999 UNDER 4' UNDER 4' 10,000 - 19,999 - 20,000 - 45,000 - OVER 45,000
KEY TO BOUNDARIES 05- 0 05 1 1.5 KILOMETERS Potential Development L-lllk fo PDlA parcel data
ACCIDENT LOCATIONS
Ox m +L O i i2 6
LC '9 +3 0 CO 0 WU 0
x;;va 10 2r- ;N 2;a-
U) F NECANICUM JCT.
Suns& HQhmy Fomt Myslde
L--> -"--==-*ax- -- I PAVEMENT CONDlTiON ------v-~~*-~w LNELOFSEMCE
I ..-...I - ... /...... ' !^ ...... --. -...... - ...... -. ._...... STRUCTURE ! A A A A A ...... __ CONDmON - -. .... - . .. -... YBEL-.. .. -- . . ..------. . - ...... -.#.8EO . WJEQ.@.?-llD...... q-.-...-.- .* ... -- .- .- -. .__M,L.k$R.. _. _. - .-,------..----.-- ..... -.-.... . A ...... ,... .-,- . ACCIDENTLOCATIONS r. , *o*. eee ,. me** . *.e .a .)e** • .* *.)* *e* ee ** 2 .. -..------.i _! ...... - - ...... - .- x...... _r . _..- AD(1 ::~~~~:~~~~~~~~1~ ,H~,,,,,I,,,,I,~,,.,,,A< ,,,,,I,,,, ~~~~.tI~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~::,,,,,,I,,,,,,,,,, ,,, 11,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1,,8,,,,,,,l,l,,.,,,,,l,,t,,,,,,,~,~~v~~~t,~~~.~r~ ,,<(,.#,~l~."'i~il'~'l:l'l"~'"'"'"~'l.'""'~'"' 8 ,,, ,, "'"'I. ."""""".1""'~~~~~~~'"".":'!"i~!'l'l1~l~lliiilllll~~lil~:i'I 'I :li~l~ill~:i~illi11.il1iil~l~'ili~l.i~11111IIllllll!lll~iiill.ll~~l~i~II~~I~III~Ir~~111111l~~'',:'i iilil,,,<,,,I<#,,,#4#,#! l,!,,#t,l ,,,It ,,##I,,,, ~l~~~!l~~,~:~:,l~~,I!,,,,,,,,,: ,I,,, ,(, !,,,, I,,,,,,,: ...... :,,,4,,, ...... :...... - ./ .... ;.------A- ...- .. - -_.. - - .-.. - -.. --. . ___ -. .-- -. .- -.- ... -... - SUNSET CAMP M.P. 37.89
LANES BY DlRECTl
::_.:_:::-~...::.: .:._:..-:..l._:-:i:1-:-:..:1i1 .:-:-i:.::..------I-:-:-:-:-:LL-:-:-::--::-::.-L:-.- -- - - :.:L: - -- .- - - -. .- .------. - -. -- - - - .- .- -. - ._I:1:-:::: :z_L.::I...:<- 1: :: ,-: .::-.-':-_: -- 1-1.::-.:L-, i PAVEMENT CONDITION ------
*111l11 8i1~itil nt8.i~ til(8ltil lil88lilt II*111I tlllil~ tI'W8 tZl8m~nl :~l~~~llllll~~tl UWIC ,8!l!8"t ,"l,*t?l "~,:##II,nt$~r#! 8~4mu m~!$q#n I~O~U4111zt~tt dt~!', IWW ~hme 1~8,t 8sIn>* > DEPICTS JANUARY 1997 DATA SET NA NA NA . -. . --.. .. PAVEMENT CONDITION EB /-lllilC_XII- /-lllilC_XII- ---.--.---~.m.-~--.--sm,-._tgXI1 Y.-Y -,-.- --.-.-.--..-,-.--,.--,-...- " -.-" "-.-" ---, Il,...Il-.I~.,~-,I "" .,~,..~,-*..~,~--.YL*-"D.L' ilY-i-,--i--,, -.-,Y.-L.mYL-."'~,~ ~.-~--=,-~,~.~~~'~IYIIX..-.L-~.-~%-~,~"-- EXISTING V/C I ------1 ------I ---- ACCESS MGT WB -- CATEGORY EB --i - .------BUS ROUTES EB STRUCTURE 320 ND ACCIDENT LOCATIONS Sunset H US26 (47 Sheet 47- Appendix 6 RELEW;U'T PLANS AND POLICIES Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Appendix 6 Revevant Plans and Policies RELEVANT PLANS AND POLICIES ODOT developed the draft Corridor Strategies Plan using many existing resources. ODOT statewide plans provide policy guidance for long range planning of needed improvements. In addition, the plans and studies listed below significantly affect the future of the Portland - Cannon Beach Junction transportation corridor. A. LIST OF PLANS AND POLICIES Statewide Plans and Studies Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP), September 1992 - Statewide transportation policy. Oregon Highway Plan (OHP), June 1991 - Highway policy and system. 1995 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, June 1995 - Guidance for bicycle facility development. 1996 - 1998 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) December, 1994 - Prioritization and scheduling for statewide transportation improvements. Oregon Benchmarks, 1994 - sets measurable standards for improving the quality of life in Oregon. 1994 Oregon Rail Freight Plan - Element of the OTP. 1992 Oregon Rail Passenger Policy and Plan - Element of the OTP. 1995 Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan - Element of the OTP. 1995 Overview of Statewide Corridors - ODOT draft. 1993 Oregon Coast Highway Master Plan Research and Inventory Report - Multimodal Component - ODOT. Westside Corridor Environmental Impact Statement. Regional Plans and Studies Metro 2040 Growth Concept Plan, December 1994 - Regional growth plan. Regional Transportation Plan Update, 1995 - Regional transportation system plan. 1995 Willamette Valley Transportation Strategy - Regional strategy for meeting the OTP. Local Jurisdiction Plans and Studies Washington County Cedar Hills/Cedar Mill Community Plan, 1983 with updates Washington County Cedar HillsKedar Mill Community Plan, 1983 with updates Washington County Sunset West Community Plan, 1983 with updates Washington County Rural/Natural Resource Plan, 1983 with updates Washington County Transportation Plan, 1988 with updates Clatsop County Comprehensive Plan Hillsboro Comprehensive Plan Beaverton Comprehensive Plan Portland Comprehensive Plan Elsie - Jewel1 Community Plan Seaside Rural Community Plan Appendix 6 - 1 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Appendix 6 Revevant Plans and Policies B. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT PLANS AND STUDIES Federal Policies Clean Air Act The Portland metropolitan area is an Environmental Protection Agency-designated non-attainment 'area for air quality, specifically for ozone and carbon monoxide (CO). CO is the primary air pollutant associated with most transportation projects, and the major source of CO is vehicular exhaust. Within the Portland airshed, the primary source of precursor pollutants that combine to form ozone is trmsy;ortation sewces such as actcmcbi!es md trucks. The federd Clem Air Act requires that states with areas that exceed the standards for air pollutants develop plans to reduce such pollutants so that the standards can be attained. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is curently developing maintenance plans for the Portland CO and ozone non-attainment areas. These plans will include improvements to the current programs for vehicle inspection and maintenance, reduction of traffic growth, and reduction of emissions from other sources. Transportation activities that are regionally significant or subject to approval or funding by a federal agency must conform to the plan, and cannot cause or contribute to a new violation of any standard in any area; increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation; or delay timely attainment of any standard or any required interim emission reductions or milestones in any area. IsEA The federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, whch funds the national highway system, gives state and local governments more flexibility in determining transportation solutions. It requires states and MPOs to cooperate in long-range transportation planning. State Plans and Policies Orenon Statewide Plannin~Goals Oregon's statewide planning goals grew out of Senate Bill 10 in 1969 and are the foundation of statewide land use planning. The Statewide Planning Goals consist of 19 goals that are state policies ' on land use, resource management, economic development, and citizen involvement. Local comprehensive plans are consistent with these goals and generally control land use. Comprehensive plans are the major force in achieving statewide goals. Goal 12 is "to provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation system." The goals attempts to not only consider all modes of transportation to meet local and regional travel needs, but also encourages the facilitation of goods and services in order to strengthen the local and regional economy. It is suggested that transportation studies and plans be revised in coordination with local and regional comprehensive plans and identify the positive and negative impacts on land use, environmental quality, energy use, and existing transportation systems. Appendix 6 - 2 Portland-Cannon Beach Junction Corridor Appendix 6 Revevant Plans and Policies Transportation Planning Rule The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) is a rule adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission to describe how transportation planning is to be done to be consistent with the statewide planning goals. This rule establishes the range of alternatives to be looked at in developing a transportation plan. The TPR also established several plan evaluation standards that are most relevant to the development of a corridor strategy. Transportation Plan The Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) of 1992 is a policy document developed by the Oregon Department of Transportation (OBOT) in response to the federal and state mandates calling for systematic planning for the hture of Oregon's transportation system. It serves as a take-off point for all general, corridor-specific, and local transportation policy and system pl ng projects in Oregon. The OTP includes four important goals: - System characteristics include balance, eff~ciency,accessibility, environmental responsibility, connectivity among places and modes, safety, and financial stability. - Develop a multimodal transportation plan that provides access to the entire state, supports acknowledged comprehensive land use plans, is sensitive to regional differences, and supports livability in urban areas. - Economic development through expansion, and diversity. - Implementation through flexible and stable financing, good management practices, and cooperation with public and private sector organizations and interests. The OTP goals for different transportation modes and for the transportation system in the corridor are each identified and addressed in Chapter Three of this Corridor Plan. The Oregon Highway Plan The Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) of 1991 represents one modal element of the overall transportation planning effort. As a modal plan, the OHP feeds into the OTP by carrying forward Oregon Transportation Commission directions and policies relating to highways. The 1991 plan developed goals for modernization, preservation, maintenance, operations and safety for state highways. This primary document called for the development of corridor plans such as the US 26 Highway corridor plan. Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, a modal plan of the OTP, was adopted in June, 1995. The plan is identified as a tool that Oregonians can use to increase their opportunities to use non-motorized transportation modes. The plan does not propose specific projects on each section of ODOT's highway, but offers the general principles and policies that ODOT follows to provide bikeways and walkways along state highways. It also provides the framework for cooperation between ODOT and local jurisdictions, and offers guidance to cities and counties for developing local bicycle and pedestrian plans. Appendix 6 - 3 NATURAL RESOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR HIGHWAY 26: CANNON BEACH JUNCTION TO PORTLAND Prepared for the OREGON DEPART NT OF TRBNSPORTATION, TUNSPORTATION DEVELOP CH Prepared By OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE WILDLIFE DIVISION Jim Turner Charlie Bruce Greg Sieglitz February 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Introduction ...... 1 Corridor Overview ...... 2 References Cited ...... 6 Personal and Agency Contacts ...... 7 Enviromentd Assessment Methodology ...... ,a 8 Environmental Suitability Criteria, Table 1...... 21 Streadish Distribution. Table 2 ...... 24 Mile by Mile Resource Scoring, Table 3 ...... 27 Meby Mile Resource Scoring, Figure 1...... 30 Appendix A . USGS Quad Maps Appendix B . National Wetland Inventory Maps Appendix C . Classifications of Oregon Wildlife, Plants and Invertebrates Appendix D . ODFW Interim Standards for Stream Crossings Appendix E . ODFW Guidelines for Timing of In-Water Work lBbGh"&AY COF&30R OVERVIEW HIGHWAY 26: CANNON BEACH JUNCTION - PORTLAND Introduction This overview represents a preliminary summary and analysis of known simcant natural resources that occur along the highway corridor. Natural resource information was summarized on a mile by mile basis with the objective of identifjing those areas that would be the most enviromentdly suitable for hture highway improvements (see Methodology section for details). At the same time, information presented can also we used as a basis for highway maintenance programs that minimize effects on adjacent sensitive resources or identifying opportunities for resource improvements or mitigation. This report does not directly attempt to address the more difficult issues of the cumulative impacts caused by existing highways including permanent habitathesource loss, habitat fragmentation, pollution, and wildlife mortality (i.e., outside of major roadkill areas). Further research and analysis at the comdor, regional and national level will be required to address these issues. Information reported has been compiled from the most current state, federal and private sources, the Oregon Natural Heritage database, published and unpublished literature, and field reconnaissance. Where possible, this information was mapped on the attached USGS quadrangle maps (Appendix A). Wetland areas are identified on National Wetland Inventory maps provided in Appendix B. Details regarding the state and federal species classification systems are reported in Appendix C. Appendices D and E provide background information regarding projects that may sect or cross streams and rivers. Systematic resource inventories will be required before a comprehensive and up-to-date assessment can be undertaken for site specific transportation projects. Corridor Overview This comdor, US Highway 26 from Cannon Beach Junction at US Highway 101 to Portland, is one of the main east west road comdors crossing the Coast Range. This route provides access to the Oregon north coast fiom Portland and Interstate 5. This corridor passes through a few small cities and communities including Cannon Beach Junction, Necanicum Junction, Elsie, Jewell Junction, Buxton, North Plains, Cedar Mill and the eastern Washington County suburban area. The ownership along corridor is a patchwork of private lands intermixed with State Forests and Parks. Most of the public lands are contained within segment four. The remaining segments are primarily in private ownership. Land use along the comdor from Cannon Beach Junction to Portland ranges from agricu!:sre (dairy and pasture lands) rural residential, forestry, agriculture (cropland), and urban. Special status species of plants and animals have been identified along this corridor. Their status is indicated in the description below in "0" as ("Federal Status"/"State Status") (Appendix C). These resburces are summarized in Table 3 and described below. This corridor crosses 70 streams reaches or drainage channels of which 65 contain salmonids and significant fish resources including river lamprey, and chum salmon (Table 2). Simcant wildlife resources along this comdor include Cope's giant salamander, and marbled murrelet. Significant invertebrate resources include czddisfly. There are no significant plants resources noted. Significant habitats include old growth Douglas fir/western redcedar, and old growth hemlock plus significant wetland upland complexes within the broad flood plains of the larger rivers. Corridor Segment 1: MP 0.00 - 10.1, US 101 (Cannon Beach Jct.) - Sunset Hwy. Forest Wayside West Edge Segment Summary: Segment 1 lies between Camon Beach Jct. at US 101 and the west edge of the Sunset Highway Wayside east of Necanicum Junction. This segment follows the Necanicum Valley and is within the Necanicum basin. There are 16 stream crossings all containing anadromous salmonids including steelhead trout, cutthroat trout, coho salmon, fall chinook salmon, chum salmon, and river lamprey. Habitat Type The habitat type within this segment is mixed conifer-deciduous (ONeil et.al. 1995). The area within the Necanicum River flood plain is mixed open grass meadow and forest patches compose of Douglas fir, western redcedar, spruce, alder, bigleaf maple and others. Numerous wetlands are located within this flood plain. The steep sides of the Necanicum River valley are forested with a dense shrub understory of salal, salmon berry, elderberry, red huckleberry, vine maple, and others (Kagan and Caicco 1992). Geology and Topography The geology and topography within this segment is a mixture of marine sedimentaxy rock and basalt outflows. This segment follows along the erosional valley of the Necanicum River which has formed in the softer sedimentary rock There is little outcropping due to thick recent sedimentary and soiI deposits. Based on this composition the surrounding topography is complex with numerous valleys and ridges and intermediate mountain peaks. Botanical Features There are no sigriificant bo?anical features are noted. Numerous wetlhnds exist along tkis segment. Many of these wetlands are associated with the streams within this corrid'or segment. All riparian wetlands are considered important habitat for wildlife and play a significant role in the quality of the stream ecosystem. There are some larger wetlands riparian and palustrine forested and emergent (Appendix B, Cowardin et.al 1979) within the first few miles of this segment. Streams/Rivers and Fish Issues There are 16 stream crossings along this segment which is closely aligned to the Necanicum River. The valley forms a flat base for locating the road. This segment crosses the Necanicum River at mile post (MP) 4 with the remaining crossing occurring over primary tributaries. The close proximity of the road to the streams can increase the potential impacts of the road on stream habitat, water quality and fish. All of the streams contain anadromous fish. Fish present include winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, coho salmon, fall chinook salmon, chum salmon, river lamprey (C21none) and others. The chum (none1SC) and fall chinook salmon spawn within the lower gradient portions of the Necanicum River and potentially in the lower reaches of the primary tributaries including Volmer and Mail Creeks. Coastal coho (PT/SC) and steelhead and cutthroat are upper tributary spawners and will occur within small intermittent tributaries. Water Quality The Necanicum River is identified as a moderate water quality impacted stream @EQ 1988). The primary impacts may be from the agricultural practices, and road location which increase sediment input and organic mater which lowers dissolved oxygen. Terrestrial Issues There are no significant terrestrial wildlife issues for this segment. Land Use and Land Ownership The land along this comdor land is predominantly in private ownership with agriculture (pasture lands) and forestry, recreation, and natural area management as the primary use. Mitigation and Safety Issues There are no specific safety or mitigation issues for this segment noted. Enhancement Opportunities There are no specifrc enhancement oppomnities for this segment noted. Yet, the close ijroxirriity of the road to many streams within this szgment provides some potential for habita: eha~cement or creation. This would most likely seek to improve water quality or riparian and strean? habitat. Corridor Segment 2: MP 10.1 - 17.5, Sunset Hwy Forest Wayside West Edge - Eastern Boundary of Forest Wayside. Segment Summary: Segment 2 lies between east of Necanicum Junction to east of East Humbug Road and contains the Sunset Highway Forest and David Douglas Wayside. This segment crosses into the Nehalern River basin. There are 8 strean, crossings in this segment. All of the streams contain anadromous fish. Fish present include winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, coho salmon, fall chinook salmon, summer chinook, river lamprey and others. Significant wildlife resource noted for this segment includes marbled rnurrelet and the northern spotted owl. Habitat Type The habitat type within this segment is mixed conifer-deciduous (ONeil et.al. 1995). This segment ascends out of the Necanicum River basin and flood plain into the Nehalem River basin. The corridor is more contained within the narrow canyons of the many streams which create the complex valleys and ridges of the area. The west end of this segment closely follows within the Humbug Creek valley. These canyon walls are vegetated with tress of Douglas fir, western redcedar, spruce and others and the dense shrub understory of salal, salmonberry, elderberry, red huckleberry, vine maple, and others (Kagan and Caicco, 1992). Geology and Topography The geology and topography within this segment continues as a mixture of marine sedimentary rock and basalt outflows. There is some basaltic intrusions within this segment. There is little outcropping along this segment thick recent sedimentary and soil deposits. The topography remains fairly eroded with numerous valley and ridges particularly in the crossing from one basin to another. Botanical Features There are no significant botanical features notes. Wetlad There are riparian wetlands associated with streams along and crossed by this segment. All riparian wetlands are considered important habitat for wildlife and play a significant role in the quaii:y cf the stream ecesyster:. There are no other signifi:arit wetiands noted alo~lgthis segmen:. Streams/Rivcrs and Fish ISSG~S There are3 stream crossings along this segment. This segment initially crosses the headwaters of the North Fork Nehalem River. It then aligns closely with Beaver Creek and then West Fork Humbug Creek for the last few miles of this segment. All of the streams contain anadromous fish. Fish present include winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, coho salmon, fall chinook salmon, summer chinook, river lamprey (C21none) and others. The fall chinook and summer chinook salmon spawn witkin the lower gradient portions of the Humbug Creek system including the west fork. Coastal coho salmon (l?T/SC) and steelhead and cutthroat are upper tributary spawners and will accur within small intermittent tributaries. Water Qualify Humbug Creek has been identified as having moderate water quality impacts @EQ 1988). These impacts may be from the erosion potential, forest use, and road location. These impacts are increased sediment, turbidity and temperature. Terrestrial Issues Significant wildlife resource noted for this segment includes marbled murrelet and the northern spotted owl. These resources are located at the road mile ending at approximately at mile post 17 and 18 along this segment. The marbled murrelet and northern spotted owl are associated with old growth forest habitat and are listed on the state and federal threatened and endangered species list (Appendix C). The murrelet is threatened status and spotted owl is endangered status. There is a elk high use area at road rnile ending @MP 17 and 18. The elk make use of the Humbug Creek flood plain area for forage and water. The riparian zone provides some openings in forest canopy while still providing some shelter. There are a couple of significant forest habitat sites identified for this segment. This includes old growth habitat within the David Douglas County Wayside and Saddle Mountain State Park at road rnile ending @MP 13. These forests consist of Douglas fir and western redcedar old growth. . Land Use and Land Ownership The land along this segment is predominantly private ownership with forestry, recreation, and natural area management as prime use. The area immediately along the roadway is a state park wayside for the total length of this segment. Mitigation and Safety Issues There are no specific safety or mitigation issues for this segment. No specific enhancement opportunities were noted. Yet, the close proximity of the road to many streams within this segment provides some potential for habitat enhancement or creation. This would most likely seek to improve riparian and stream habitat. Corridor Segment 3: 17.5 - 23, Eastern Boundary Forest Wayside - Western Wayside Boundary Segment Summary: Segment 3 lies between East Humbug road to east of Jewel1 Junclion. This segment follows along the Humbug Creek and Nehalem River valleys. There are 6 stream crossings along this segment. All contain anadrpmous fish. Significant species include coastal coho salmon. Significant invertebrate species include the Clatsop philocascan caddisfly. Significant wildlife resource noted for this segment includes marbled murrelet habitat. There is high elk use along the Humbug Creek flood plain. Habitat Type The habitat type within this segment is mixed conifer-deciduous (OWeil et.al. 1995). This segment follows along the Humbug Creek and Nehalem River valleys. This segment lies in the broad flood plains of the Humbug Creek and Nehalem River. These streams meander through these broad and flat flood plains. The riparian vegetation is composed of alder and maple with shrub layer of vine maple, salmon berry and others. The valley sides steepen and are vegetated with tress of Douglas fir, western redcedar, spruce and others with a dense shrub understory of salal, salmon berry, elderberry, red huckleberry, vine maple, and others (Kagan and Caicco, 1992). Geology and Topography The geology and topography within this segment continues as a mixture of marine sedimentary rock and basalt outflows. The topography remains fairly eroded and subject to mass failure, land slide. There remain numerous valleys and ridges on either side of the flat flood plains which this segment is aligned. Botanical Features There are no signrficant botanical features noted. There are riparian wetlands associated with streams along and crossed by this segment. All riparian wetlands are considered importzqt habitat for wildlife and play a significant role in the quality of the stream ecosystem. Other significant wetlands occur along this segment for its total length and are located within the flood plains of Humbug Creek and Nehalem River systems. These include riparian and palustrine, forested and emergent wetlands (Appendix B, Cowardin et. al. 1979). These areas are important for providing diverse habitat within the forest and maintaining water quality. Streams/Rivers and Fish Issues There are 6 stream crossings dong this segment. This segment primarily runs adjacent to the Humbug Creek. The last two miles of this segment @MP 22 and 23 are associated with Nehalem River. All of the streams contain anadromous fish. Fish present include winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, coho salmon, fall chinook salmon, summer chinook salmon and others. The fall chinook and summer chinook salmon spawn within the lower gradient portions of the Humbug Creek system and Nehalem River. Coastal coho (PTfSC), steelhead and cutthroat are upper tributary spawners and will occur within small intermittent tributaries. Significant invertebrate species include the Clatsop philocascan caddisfly, PhiZocasca oron (C2/none), is iocated in Humbug Creek @MP 20. Water Qualig The Nehalem River and Humbug Creek have moderate water quality impacts (DEQ 1988). The impacts are from agricultural practices and road location and riparian zone impacts within the Humbug Creek and Nehalem River valleys. These impacts are primarily increased sediments into the river and reduction of dissolve oxygen from increased organic mater and higher temperatures. The Nehalem River is a proposed water quality limited stream due to high summer temperatures and high fecal coliform counts (DEQ 1995). Terrestrial Issues Significant wildlife resource noted for this segment includes marbled murrelet habitat. These resources are located at the beginning of the segment and overlap with segment 2 at approximately mile 18. The marbled murrelet v)are associated with old growth forest habitat. There is high elk use within this segment. The elk will move back and forth from mountain habitat to the broad forested flood plains and forested wetlands along the Humbug Creek system. These is a significant old growth western hemlock and vine maple habitat at approximately mile 2 1 in private ownership. Land Use and Land Ownership The land is mixed with private and some public State forest lands. Primary land use is forest~j, recreation and as a natural resource area. Mitigation and Safety Isshes There are no specific safety or mitigation issues for this segment. Enkrancement Opportunities No specific enhancement opportunities were noted. The close proximity of the road to many streams within this segment provides some potential for habitat enhancement or creation. This would most likely seek to improve riparian and stream habitat. Corridor Segment 4: 23.0 - 45.5, Western Wayside boundary - OR 47 (Staley's Jct.) Segment Summaw: Segment 4 begins east of Jewel1 Junction extending to Staley's Junction at Oregon highway 47. This follows the valleys of main tributaries of the Nehalem River and the Tualatin River. There are 19 stream crossings along this segment ofwhich 14 contain anadromous fish. Significant fish species include coastal coho salmon. Significant wildlife resource noted for this segment includes the Cope's giant salamander Habitat Type The habitat type within this segment is mixed conifer-deciduous (O'Neil et.al. 1995). The initial portion of this segment follows along the Quartz Creek system as part of the lower Nehalem River. This segment then crosses into the upper Nehalem basin and follows along the Rock Creek and Wolf Creek system. This is more similar to segment 2 with the narrow creek valleys and dense conifer forests of Douglas-fir, western redcedar, western hemlock and others with a dense shrub understory of salal, salmonbeny, elderberry, red huckleberry, vine maple, and others . (Kagan and Caicco, 1992). The gradient of this segment lowers as the summit is approached. There are some forest openings due to forest practices and agricultural use in limited areas along this segment. GeoIog~and Topography The geology and topography within this segment continues as a mixture of intrusive basalts, basaltic marine sedimentary rock and pillow basalts. There is little outcropping along this segment thick recent sedimentary and soil deposits. The topography remains fairly eroded and sabject to nass failure, land slide. One sire is located at the beginning of this seginent near road miie ending at miie post 24. (At and. Hyndman, 1993;Walker and MacLeod, 1991) There remain numerous valleys and ridges on either side of this segment and they tend :o be broader and flatter in this segment as the summit of the Coast Range is approached and crossed. Botanical Features There are no significant botanical features noted. The wetlands dong this segment are primarily associated with the streanas. All riparian wetlands are considered important habitat for wildlife and play a significmt role in the quality of the stream ecosystem. StreamdRivers and Fish Issues There are 19 stream crossings along this segment. This segment runs adjacent to the Quwtz and W-olf Creeks in the lower Nehalem basin and then along upper Nehalem River. The end of this segment then crosses into the Dairy Creek basin of the TualatidWiilamette River system. All of the streams on the west side in the upper Nehalem system contain anadromous fish. Fish present include winter steelhead, cutthroat trout, coho salmon, and others. The Coho (PTISC) and steelhead and cutthroat are upper tributary spawners and will occur within small intermittent tributaries. On the east side all streams contain cutthroat trout, resident. Some potential exists for anadromous cutthroat within the Tualatin system yet this remains unlikely due to probable barrier at Willarnette Falls on the Willamette River. Water Quality On the west side, Rock Creek and the upper Nehalem River have moderate water quality impacts. On the east side, West Fork Dairy Creek has severe water quality impacts (DEQ 1988). The impacts are from forest practices along Rock Creek and agricultural practices along the upper Nehalem River valley. These impacts are primarily increased sediments into the river and reduction of dissolved oxygen due to organic material being added to the stream. The Nehalem . River is proposed as a water quality limited stream due to high summer temperatures. The West Fork Dairy Creek is proposed as a water quality stream due to high fecal coliform and high phosphorus @EQ 1995). TerrestriaI Issues Significant wildlife resource noted for this segment includes the Cope's giant salamander (none/SU) located at the beginning of this segment at road mile ending @MP 25. Significant habitat area was identified by field biologists at the old Sterling Ranch at road mile ending @MP 28. This is noted for its habitat diversity, open spaces, wetland meadows, and f~estedge. Land Use and Land Ownership The land is mixed private and public, state forest, ownership. The State forest lands are predominantly within the'middle portion of this segment between approximately mile posts 26 to 40. The primary uses are forestry, recreation, and natural areas. Mitigation and Safety Issues There are no specific safety or mitigation issues for this segment. Emharrcement Opportunities No specific enhancement opportunities were noted. Yet, the close proximity of the road to many streams within this segment provides some potential for habitat enhancement or creation. This would most likely seek to improve water quality and riparian and stream habitat. Corridor Segment 5: MP 45.5 - 53.3, OR 47 (Staley's Jct.) - OR 6 (Tillamook Jct.) Segment Summarv: Segment 5 lies between Staley's Junction at Oregon highway 47 and Tillamook Junction at Oregon highway 6. This segment is contained within the Tualatin basin (part of the Willamette basin). There are 5 stream crossings of which all contain salmonids with 2 containing anadromous salmonids. Habitat Type The habitat type within this segment is mixed conifer-deciduous (O'Neil et.al. 1995). This segment is contained within the Tualatin basin (part of the Wdarnette basin). It follows the valley of two main tributaries of Dairy Creek and emerges fiom the mountains into the broader Tualatin valley. The dominant vegetation is Douglas fir, western redcedar, western hemlock and others with a dense shrub understory of salal, salmon berry, elderberry, red huckleberry, vine maple, and others (Kagan and Caicco, 1992). This segment moves into the larger valleys of the Tualatin basin with greater presence of deciduous trees of bigleaf maple, and alder, ash and cotton wood along streams. Geology and Topography The geology and topography within this segment now contains more basalts from the Columbia plateau flows and resent unconsolidated deposits on the eastern end of this segment. There is little outcropping along this segment thick recent sedimentary and soil deposits. The topography fiai.iens moving dowri the Tualatin Valley. The streams have broad flood plains and tend to meander and rework deposits (except where restrained). The topography along the outer extent of this segment remains hilly but flatter and less sharp than the previous segments. Botanical Features There are no significant botanical features noted. Wetlands Greater numbers and mes of wetlands appear within this segment. Many of these wetlands are associated with the streams crossed and adjacent to this segment. MI riparian wetlands are considered important habitat for wildlife and play a significant role in the quality of the stream ecosystem. Other significant wetlands identified within this segment are associated with West Fork Dairy Creek. These include many palustrine forested and emergent wetlands (Appendix E, Cowardin et. al. 1979) located between approximately mile post 46 to 50. Streams/Rivers and Fish Issues There are 5 stream crossings along this segment. This segment runs adjacent to West Fork Dairy Creek for most of its extent from mile post 46 to 50. This segment then leaves the West Fork Dairy Creek crossing some small tributaries. Most of the streams within this segment contain resident cutthroat trout. Some potential exists for anadromous cutthroat within the Tualatin system yet this remains unlikely due to probable bamer at Willarnette Falls on the Willamette River. Water Quality West Fork Dairy Creek has severe water quality impacts (DEQ 1988). The impacts are fiom agricultural practices and riparian zone impacts. These impacts are primarily increased sediments into the river and reduction of dissolved oxygen due to organic material being added to the stream. Terrestrial Issues There are no significant wildlife resource are noted for this segment. Land Use and Land Ownership The land is in private ownership with agriculture (pasture) and forestry use. Miligation arrd Sajeety issrres There are no specific safety or mitigation issues for this segment. Enhancement Opportunities No specific enhancement opportunities were noted. Yet, the close proximity of the road to many streams within this segment provides some potential for habitat enhancement or creation. This would most likely seek to improve water quality and riparian and stream habitat. Corridor Segment 6: 53.3 - 61.1, OR 6 (Tillamook Jet) - Portland UGB Segment 6 lies between Tillamook Junction at Oregon highway 6 and Portland's east uhan growth boundary. This segment is contained within the Tualatin basin (part of the Willamette basin). There are 7 stream crossings along this segment of which all contain cutthroat trout and one containing winter steelhead. Habitat Type The habitat type within this segment is mixed conifer-deciduous, agriculture and urban (O'Neil et.al. 1995). This segment is contained within the Tualatin basin draining into Beaverton Creek. This segment no longer directly follows along stream valley. It crosses many streams moving across the rolling hill and valley area dominated by open agricultural fields with forest patches. The natural vegetation consists of Douglas fu, western redcedar, western hemlock, and others with maple, ash, and oak. A dense shrub understory of salal, salmon berry, elderberry, red huckleberry, vine maple, and others (Kagan and Caicco 1992) occurs in the remnant natural areas. Most of the areas is cultivated for pasture and crops with little natural vegetation remaining. Geology and Topography The geology and topography within this segment consists basalts from the Columbia plateau flows and resent unconsolidated deposits. There is no rock outcropping along this segment thick recent sedimentary and soil deposits. The topography flattens with the large flood plain deposits being reworked by various small tributaries and drainages. These create the numerous swales and gently sloping terrain. PERSONAL ANG AGENCY CONTACTS Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife: Joe Sheanan, Assistant District Fish Biologist, Seaside Herman Biederbeck, District Wildlife Biologist, Tillamook Tom Thornton, District Wildlife Biologist, Forest Grove Pat Keeley, Assistant District Fish Biologist, Clackamas Kathy Kostow, Genenetic Program Leader, Fish Division, Portland Hal Weeks, Threatened and Endangered Fish Fish Division, Portland Oregon Natureal Heritage Program: Sue Vrilakas - Data Manager and Botanist, The Nature Conservancy, Porltand hlETZ~ODOEOGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF RESOURCES We devel6ped a format ahdressed below for ascribing a numerical score to each of the natural resources relative to their distance from the highway (i.e., zones) and collectively within each highway mile segment. Our efforts were intended to highlight areas along the highways which contained natural resource issues and to characterize the magnitude of those issues. We did not attempt to rank the resources one against the others, although that was a consideration as indicated below. Legally or potentially required management responses to the various resources does not allow a rneaninal ranking. Distance from the Highway To begin, we developed a weighted numerical score by estimating (tiom topographic mapsthe distancefrom the resource to the existing highway and giving those resources closer to the highway a higher score (i.e., potential impact is higher). A resource could exist in one or more of the distance zones (e.g., a river which ran roughly perpendicular to the existing highwav could occur within all three of the distance zones). In the case where a resource was found in more than one distance zone, the scores for each of the zones were added together. Zone A. Score = 5. Description: 0-100 yards from the existing roadway. Zone B. Score = 3. Description: 100-440 yards from the existing roadway. Zone C. Score = 1. Description: 440-2560 yards (0.25-1.5 miles) from the existing roadway. It is recognized that the selected distance zones are somewhat arbitrary, but in general reflect a combination of the "avoidance potential" of potential highway projects and the need to address animals with relatively large home ranges (e.g., northern spotted owl). Resources were initially identified by (1) we, (2) whether they receive formal protection under regulation, were identified as resources of concern, or were aesthetidsocial in nature, and (3) the potential type of reqonse shown by ODOT to the presence of these resources (Table 1). From this initial list, resources were grouped and a weighted score for each resource was developed as follows: Threatened and Endangered Species Score = 5. Federal or State Threatened or Endangered Species. Each resource is tallied individually. The score is applied to either the actual resource site or, most often, to the habitat buffer around site, e.g., spotted owl c~rcie,bald eagie management areas, listed plants. Resource of Concern Score = 3. Federal Candidate Species, State Sensitive Species, habitats (unsurveyed) in which candidate/sensitive species are probable to occur, and plant communities or other botanical features which are uncommon, rare, or isolated (e.g., unique riparian areas). Each resource is tallied individually. The score is applied to the resource site or habitat area. Deer/Elk Collision Areas Score = 3. Resource of Concern. Score applied within Zone A, on both sides of the highway. These are areas with serious regular vehicle deedelk collisions. Deer/EIk/Winter Range Score = 5. Regulated Resource. Score applied to Zones B and C only; (not likely that animals "winter" within 100 yards of road). Bald Eagle Wintering Area Score = 3. Resource of Concern. Score applied to areas within 0.25 miles of an aquatic resource (most often a river) used for foraging and perching; this may be within any or all of Zones A, B, or C. Score = 5. Regulated Resource. Only 1 water body is tallied per Zone, even if more than one exist within the Zone. Example: 3 wetlands on left side of roadway in Zone C = score of 5 (5x1); 10 wetlands and a river on right side of roadway in Zones A,B, and C = score of 45 (5x5 + 5x3 + 5x 1). Land Use (two categories, based on relative contribution to conservation of biological resources) Score = 5. Examples: National Wildlife Rehges, Congressionally Designated Wilderness Areas, Late-Successional Reserves (Forest Plan), ODFW lands, Research Natural Areas, Areas of Critical Ecological Concern (BLM ACEC's), Willamette bnway. Score = 3. Examples: State Parks, County Parks, Waysides, Wid and Scenic Rivers, coordinated management plans with private landowners. Score = 1. Exampies: General natural resource viewing opportunities along the corridor (e.g., mountain vista, geological interest area) that are not otherwise identified above; known areas of periodic collisions with deer and elk. I ' A total "Resource Score" was then calculated by multiplying the Resource Type by the Distance Zone score. Example: a Swainson's hawk nest is a Resource of Concern (Resource Type score = 3); the nest lies 250 yards fiom the existing highway (distance zone score = 2); total Resource Score (3x2) = 6. Example: a wetland has been bisected by the existing highway and now exists as two smaller wetlands, both of which lie within 100 yards of the highway. Wetlands are a Regulated Resource (each get a Resource Type score 5), and each receive a Distance Zone score of 3; each wetland receives a total Resource Score of 15. The scoring for the resources listed above is displayed in two formats. First, a spreadsheet (Table 2 ) was developed which lists the significant resources present along the highway. Each row in the spreadsheet represents one mile of highway. The importance and distance scores are displayed for each side of the highway (left and right). The left and right sides of the highway are determined as you travel "up" the highway starting at the lowest milepost number. Next, these data were imported into a statistical package (SigmaPlotO) where they could be displayed in bar graph form (Figure 1). This allows the reader to view the scores in relation to adjoining miles, segments, and the highway corridor as a whole. However, depending upon the resource and the legal response that may be required, it may well be that some mile segments with a "low" total score as compared to others are just as suitable for highway improvements. In general, we found that the higher the score the less environmentally suitable the highway segment or subsegment. Table 1. Environmental Suitability Criteria used in characterizing significant natural resources along highway corridors. Resources are identified by (1) ripe, (2) whether they receive formzl protection under Reguiation, are identified as Resources of Concern, or are Aesthetic/Social in nature, and the (3)potential Type of Response shown by ODOT to the presence of these resources. Endangered (T&E) Species onsult with USFWS or (includes plants and animals) Must assure "No Affect"; Guidelines for Seasonal Disturbance; May involve coordination with ODFW; Biological Assessment; State Candidate Species Coordination with ODFW or Habitat Types; Plant Coordination with Resource oak woodlands, native Agencies (e.g., Oregon Natural Heritage Program); Conservation measures on a Streams with fish (anadromous or other) 2) Regulatory (see Oregon 3) Resource of Concern: (see Candidate and Sensitive 2) ODFW Consult. (Clean Water Act, Section CountyMunicipal Plans Easements - Consult with Federal and state agencies; possible biological evaluation addressing sensitive species. -- Land Use - State Lar,ds Regulatory Consult with a3propriate state land management agency; agreements Land Use - Tribal Lands Regulatory Consult with Tribal Councils; I easements Land Use - Private Lands Regulatory purchase; willing sellers; condemnation Wildlife Refuges - Federal Regulatory Easement; Habitat replacement; Section 4(F) Wildlife Management Areas .- Documentation State Historic Resource Site, Park Regulatory Habitat Mitigation lands (city,county, state,federal), Wilderness (applies to Federal Areas, Wildlife Mgt. Areas, Department of Wildlife Refbges Transportation) Wild and Scenic Rivers Regulatory Coordinate with applicable Federal agency; compliance with Wid & Scenic River designation. Federally Designated Regulatory Easement; actions to be in Wilderness Areas compliance with mgt. of federal lands Safety Issues related to Fish Coordination with ODFW ; and Wildlife Resources (e-g., deer collision areas) ConservatiodSafety measures on a case-by-case basis, e.g., signing, fencing, underpass, overpass Enhancement Opportunities Visual Resources Report; (e.g., turnout lanes for Inclusion of opportunities on viewing) a case-by-case basis Table 2. Stream and Fish Distribution for Highway 26 STREAM NAME MILE POST SPECIES COIMPOSXTIBN Segment 1 Meyer Creek 0.9 ws,co,cu Volrner Creek, 2.2 ws,co,cu Trib Necanicum River ? 2.4 ws,co,cu rib Necanicum River ? 2.6 ws,co,cu Salmon Creek I 2.9 1 ws,co,cu 11 I (1 Necanicum River I 4.4 I ws,co,cu,fc,chu~rl I 11 Trib Necanicum + I 5.3 ( ws,co,cu I Lindsley Creek 5.9 1 ws,co,cu I 11 Alder Creek 6.8 1 ws,co,cu I North Forkvish Hatchery) 7.1 ws,co,cu I I 11 Wolf Creek 1 7.6 1 ws,co;cu I, Little Humbug Creek 8.2 ws,co,cu 11 Charlie Creek I 8.8 1 ws,co,cu I Trib Necanicum River I 9.0 I ws,co,cu Necanicum River 10.2 ws,co,cu,fc,chum,rl Little North Fork Nehalem River 12.9 ws,co,cu A Trib Ltl N Fk Nahalem River + 13.1 ws,co,cu ' Trib Ltl N 2% Nahalem River + 13.5 ws,co,cu Trib W Humbug Creek + 13.9 ws,co,cu Trib ? 15.3 ws,co,cu West Humbug, Creek 16.3 co,ws,fc,su 1 East Humbug Creek I 17.4 1 co,ws,fc,su Segment J 1- I I Alder Creek 18.1 1 ws,co.cu Table 2. Stream and Fish Distribution for Highway 26 Table 2. Stream and Fish Distribution for Highway 26 Species codes: cu = cutthroat trout, co = coho salmon, ws = winter steelhead, fc = fhll chinook salmon, su = summer chinook salmon, rl = river lamprey, chum = chum salmon Stream Name Modifier - (+) stream shorn on USGS quads and not appearing on ODOT chart (need to be verified). (?)stream appears on ODOT chart not shown on USGS quad (needs to be verified). Table 3. Resource Scoring for Highway 26 Cannon Beach Jct. to Portland I -rOR A DRNLED DEKRlmOH OF THC UJCAT)OY OF INMVlWM RESOURCES SEE QVLRVILW TM MDUSOS MAPS. A . WINI 00 YARDS (01 MITERS) B - I 00 - 440 YARDS (01 - 402 METERS) C - 440 - 2040 (402 - 241 4 MCI'CRS) Table 3. Resource Scoring for Highway 26 Cannon Beach Jct. to Portland A - WTMIN I (30 YARDS (91 MCITRS) 8 -1 00 - 440 YARDS (91 - 402 MmRL) ? C - 440 - 2 102 - 241 4 MLTLRB) Table 3. Resource Scoring for Highway 26 Cannon Beach Jct. to Portland Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoring Segment #I t 200 : I I I I I I I I I 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Milepost Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoiaing Segment #2 Milepost Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoring Segment #3 Milepost @$$B@#Left-side score Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoring Segment #4 Milepost Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoring Segment #5 Milepost Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoring Segment $6 Milepost Figure 1. Highway 26(west) Resource Scoring Segment #7 Milepost !%%%$@ Left-side score APPENDIX USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS I Appendix A consists of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute topographical maps that encompass the highway corridors and adjacent lands, usually up to several miles on either side of the highway. Most of the mappable natural resource data collected during this assessment has been plotted on the maps at least up to 1.5 miles on either side of the highways. Information of a general nature or which extends over a large area was addressed only in the text. Initial resource information was obtained through the Oregon Natural Heritage Program (ONHP) . . database located in Portland. The ONHP maintains an Oregon database for occurrences of state and federal Endangered or Threatened species, .species that are Candidates for listing, federal Species of Concern, state Sensitive species, and Heritage Program Lists. Information in the ONHP database is both site specific and of a general nature and depends primarily on data collected by federal and state agencies, colleges, universities, local landowners, volunteers and ONHP staff The ONHP data was plotted in several ways. Site data, such as a bald eagle nest or the location of a rare plant, was noted on the maps with a round, square, or triangular symbol. The round symbol was used for plants and the triangle was used for animals when the exact location was known. When an exact location was unknown the square symbol was used. These can be considered to be within approximately 114 mile of the true location. Polygons were use to map the boundaries of rare and unusual plant communities since these areas often cover many acres. ODFW continues to develop an extensive vertebrate database for all Oregon species, the Oregon Species Information System (OSIS). OSIS includes detailed some site specific information on key species such as the northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet. OSIS was queried for listed or sensitive species using the ARC/INFO geographic information system located at ODFW's Northwest Regional Office. A spatial data layer was generated for each highway using the U.S. Census Bureau's county road network datasets. A 1.5 mile buffer was created and attached to the highway as a search radius for sites which fall within the highway corridor. Other wildlife, fish, and plant databases were queried within ODFW, other agencies such as the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department, Oregon State University, and the U.S. Forest Service. Local agency field biologists provided unpublished information on big game "roadkill" areas, public access areas, riparian enhancement areas, and site specific data not yet entered into a database. APPENDIX B NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPS Appendix B is a set of National Wetland Inventory Maps produced by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service which cover the highway corridor. These maps were produced by interpreting stereoscopic high altitude photographs taken over a period of years from 1974 through 1982. These maps are continually being updated as fiinding allows. In western Oregon it should be noted that about 212 maps that cover most of the Coast Range are of the 1970's vintage. The wetlands identified on the photos were in most cases delineated and labeled on copies of the USGS 7.5 minute topagraphical maps. In some areas of the state USGS quad maps did not exist at the time and wetlands were mapped on orthophotos themselves. Due to the nature of photointerpretation and seasonal fluctuations of wetlands, these maps represent a range of accuracy and wetlands smaller than 2-3 acres may be missed. On the ground knowledge and field visits during proper times of the year should be used in conjunction with these maps when dealing with individual wetlands and associated highway projects. APPENDIX CLASSIFICATION OF OREGON PLANTS, ANIMALS AND INVERTEBRATES Numerous and often cofising lists of species with various legal connotations exist. The Oregon Natural Heritage Program updates the most comprehensive list every two years with the most recent being published in 1995, Rare, Threatened and Enhgered Plants sand Animals qf Oregon. The publication contains all the state and federally listed or classified plants, animals and invertebrates. However, the publication has its limitations and does not address more common species, game animals or commercially valuable fish and wildlife. In this appendix we have attached the most current Oregon state or federal lists of plants, animals and invertebrates that have received some kind of legal classification or official recognition that should be considered during transportation planning. These lists include the following: ..I. The Class~$cationof Oregon Wildlife published by the Oregon Department of Fish and wildlife (ODFW); This list, based on state laws and administrative rules, identifies state game animals, protected species and unprotected species. 2. The Oregon List of Threatened and Endangered Fish and Wildlife Species is maintained by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and periodically updated. Species listed are protected on state lands only. The 1995 State Legislature modified state agency responsibilities for listed species. State agencies should consult with ODFW to determine necessary actions for protection of listed species. It should be noted that all but 6 species on this list are also federally listed.. 3. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife list also maintains a similar list of candidate species designated Sensitive species. This list has been developed to identifjr species of fish and wildlife that could become threatened or endangered in the &re unless conservation programs are developed and implemented. This is a reference list and does not legally require any special action by other agencies, The list is broken into several categories depending upon the known or suspected status of each species. 4. The State of Oregon Eitdangered and Threatened Lists for Plants is published and maintained by the Oregon Department of Agriculture. Plants listed are protected by law only on state lands. State agencies should consult with the Department of Agriculture if listed species are located on state lands they manage or may impact through their programs. The Department of Agriculture also maintains a list of plant species that are candidates for listing. These are summarized in A Guide to the State of Oregon Candidate List for Plants. 5. Federally Listed Threatened, Endangered, Proposed and Candidate Species which may occur in Oregon. This list is maintained by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Department of Interior, Oregon State Office in Portland. Agencies should consult with that office when any of these species are known or suspected to occur within transportation planning areas and on projects that receive federal fbnding. The USFWS is in the process of changing their method of listing Candidate species, however this changeover will not take place officially until it is listed in the Federal Register. C1, C2, and C3 categories will be eliminated and replaced with C (candidate), C=+ (former C1 candidate but which will be listed as a species of concern when the next formal Notice of Review is published), and SoC (formerly C2) which stands for Species of Concern (species that may wanant listing but more information is needed). APPENDIX D OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE INTERIM STANDARDS AND CRITERLA FOR STREAM-ROAD CROSSINGS Notice: This material is currently undergoing internal and external review and is, therefore, subject to change in the short term, However, works completed using (meeting) these interim criteria and standards will be considered to be in compliance with final guidelines when adopted. Authority Authority is granted to ODFW by ORS 498.268 and ORS 509.605, et al, to require any person placing an artificial obstruction across a stream to provide a fishway for anadromous, food and game fish species where these are present. Fish passage accommodations will usually be required on any stream, regardless of size, perennial or intermittent, if it is utilized by fish during any significant period of the year. In addition, ODFW may recommend fish passage accommodations at structures constructed in any stream that has a history or potential for fish production if applicable ODFW Basin Fish Management Plans call for the establishment or re-establishment of these populations. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) shall be contacted to determine fish presence and identifL fish passage needs at proposed road-waterway crossing projects if such is in question. Project proponents should assume that accommodations for fish passage will be required at any road crossing regardless of stream size. Fihway Design: Philosophy, Theory and Practice When designing fish passage facilities, the following biological variables should be considered: Species of fish present Lifestages to be impacted Migration timing of affected speciesflifestages Fish passage design is normally based on the weakest species or Westage requiring access and should accommodate the weakest individual within that group. Management objectives and other relevant factors may, however, direct deviation fiom this standard. Conventions As used in these discussions of standards, designs and criteria, the "entrance" and "exit" of a culvert or fishway is from the fish's perspective as it moves upstream. Thus, the "entrance" refers to the downstream portion of the structure while the "exit" is the upstream end. Preferred Road-Stream Crossing Structures Where fishspassagefacilitiks are required by ODFW, the following structure types shall be considered for use in the displayed order of preference: Bridge (with no channel constriction) Temporary culvert Bottomless Arch culvert Embedded elliptical culvert Embedded round culvert Embedded box (concrete) or round smooth-walled culvert Non-embedded culvert; box or metal Baffled culvert; box or metal Structure with fishway General Considerations Corrugated metal culverts are generally preferred over smooth-surfaced culverts. Deep corrugations are preferred over shallow corrugations. Bottomless arch and embedded culverts shall be placed at or near the same gradient as the natural streambed and shall be at least as wide as the stream channel (i.e., no lateral encroachment). Gradients (slope) for non-embedded, non-baffled culverts shall not exceed 0.5%. Properly baed or weired culverts are appropriate for gradients between 0.5% and 5%. Structures with fishways (i.e., fish ladders) generally will be required where gradients exceed 5%. Water-crossing projects shall incorporate mitigation measures, as necessary, to achieve no-net- loss of fish production capacity. It is not considered necessary or practical to design culverts to pass fish at flood stage or 100% of the time. Fish generally move after floods peaks pass. The maximum flow for determining fish passage requirements within culverts is the discharge (cfs) exceeded 10% of the time when fish are migrating, generally October through April. Hydraulic controls may be required to (I) improve culvert entrance and exit conditions, (2) concentrate low flows, (3) prevent erosion of stream bed and banks, or (4) allow passage of bedload material. The need for, and details of, these project features need to be developed in consultation with ODFW. Criteria for Upstream Movement of Adult Fish Adult anadromous fish generally expend approximately 80% of their stored energy reserve during normal upstream migration to suitable spawning areas. Undue exertion or delay at stream-road crossings due to unsuccessfbl passage attempts at inadequate (blocking) structures can lead to reduced spawning success and pre-spawning mortality. Where fish passage is required by ODFW (in general, wherever fish are present), the following guidelines shall be utilized for preliminary design. These guidelines should be observed when designing flows in culverts or fishways during months when upstream migration is likely for any adult fish present. Maximum Virater Velocities Table 1 Recommended Maximum Water Velocities (@s) for: Culvert Length Salmon & Adult Pink and Churn (ft) Steelhead Trout (>6") Salmon Under 5 0' 6.0 . Baffled 8.0 50 to 100' 4.0 100 to 200' 3 .o 200 to 300' 2.0 3 OO+' 1.8 Minimum Water De~th o Twelve (12) inches for adult chinook salmon; Ten (10) inches for salmon other than chinook, steelhead, sea-run cutthroat trout and other trout over 20 inches in length; and Eight (8) inches for trout under 20 inches, kokanee and migrating juvenile salmon and steelhead. Entrance Jump: Maximum Vertical Height A backwatered or partially submerged culvert entrance is preferred but the following maximum jumps are allowable: One(1) foot for salmon and steelhead adults Six (6) inches for trout and kokanee adults and salmon and steelhead juveniles. The above are also the maximum jumps when a series ofjumps or pools are required. Criteria for Upstream Migration of Juvenile Salmonids Passage criteria for juvenile salmonids are generally not well documented or understood. It is, however, .important that juvenile salmon and trout not be blocked from using suitable stream habitats. Typically, juvenile salmonids move upstream and into smaller tributaries when fall rains make these habitats suitable. To optimize use of these habitats, in-channel obstructions to migration must be minimized. Juvenile salmonids, by virtue of their small size, are less capable svvimers when compared to adults. Therefore, maximum water velocity and swimming distance criteria are necessarily lower than those for adults. Water Crossing Structures The following technical provisions shall apply to the specified crossing structure types: Bridges Properly installed bridges pose the least impact on crossed water courses and are, therefore, generally preferred by ODFW. It is understood that bridging costs can be relatively high and that project economics is a valid consideration when evaluating road-stream crossing alternatives. Excavation for and placement of the foundation, abutments and superstructure shall be outside the ordinary high water line unless the construction site is separated from live flow by use of an approved dike, cofferdam or similar structure. Variance from this requirement may be granted by ODFW. AlI bridge structure shall be placed in a manner to avoid damage to the streambed. The bridge shall be designed and constructed high enough to pass 100-year flows with consideration given to the passage of debris likely to be encountered at extreme flows. Exception shall be considered if an applicant provides hydrologic or other information that supports alternative design criteria. Abutments, piers, pilings, sills, approach fill, etc., shall not constrict the flow so as to cause any appreciable increase (not to exceed 0.2 feet) in backwater elevation (calculated at the 100-year flood level) and shall be aligned to cause the least effect on the hydraulics of the stream. Riprap materials used for structure protection shall be angular rock and the placement shall be designed and installed to withstand a 100-year flow event. Tem~oraryCulverts--By definition, culverts designed to be left in place less than 2 years. Where fish passage is a concern during the installed period, temporary culverts shall be designed and installed to provide adequate fish passage (as per criteria stated above) for those species and lifestages determined to be present and at risk. Where culverts are to be left in place between October 1 and June 15, the culvert shall be designed to maintain structural integrity to the 50-year flow with consideration of the debris loading likely to be encountered. Where culverts are to be left in place between June 16 and September 30, the culvert shall be large enough to pass all flows likely to be encountered. Imported fill associated with a temporary culvert installation shall consist of clean rounded gravel ranging in size fiom %-inch to 3-inches in diameter. The use of clean angular rock may be approved for use where rounded rock is not reasonably available. . A temporary culvert shall be removed and approaches blocked to vehicular trffic within 2 years of installation. Any angular rock fill used in the construction of the crossing shall be removed to an upland area outside the 50-year flood plain. Permanent Culverts Where fish are present and passage is a concern, culverts shall be designed and installed to provide adequate fish passage (as per criteria stated above) for those species and lifestages determined to be present and at risk. High water velocity, shallow water depth within the culvert, excessive vertical drop-at the culvert outfall, and debris blockages are the most fiequent causes of fish passage problems at culverts.. Therefore, culverts shall be designed and installed to avoid these defects. To facilitate fish passage, culverts shall be designed and installed to the following standards: (1) Culverts may be approved for placement in small streams if placed on a flat gradient with the bottom of the culvert placed below the level of the streambed (imbedded) a minimum of 20 percent of the culvert diameter for round culverts, or 20 percent of the vertical rise for elliptical culverts. The 20 percent placement below the streambed shall be measured at the culvert outlet (downstream end). Culvert width at the bed, or footing width, should be equal to or greater than the normal winter flow width of the streambed at the crossing site. (2) Where culvert installation is not feasible as described in (1) above, the culvert design shall include the following elements: Water depth at any location within culverts installed without a natural bed shall not be less than that identified in the Minimum Water Depth section above during months of likely fish use. The low flow design, to be used to determine the minimum depth of flow in the culvert, is either (a) the two-year seven-day low flow discharge for the subject basin or (b) the 95 percent exceedance flow for migration months of the fish species of concern. Were flow information is unavailable for the project drainage, calibrated or estimated flows fiom hydrologically similar gauged drainage areas may be used. The high flow design discharge, used to determine maximum velocity in a culvert (see Table 1 above), is the flow that is not exceeded more than 10 percent of the time during the months of adult fish migration. The two-year peak flow may be used where stream flow data are unavaiIable. e The bottom of the culvert shall be placed below the level of the streambed (imbedded) a minimum of 20 percent of the culvert diameter for round culverts, or 20 percent of the vertical rise for elliptical culverts. The 20 percent placement below the streambed shall be measured at the culvert outlet. The downstream bed elevation, used for hydraulic calculations and culvert placement in relation to bed elevation shall be taken at a point a least 25 feet downstream of the culvert. The culvert capacity for flood design flow shall be determined by using the remaining capacity (non-imbedded portion) of the culvert. Appropriate statistical or hydrologic methods must be applied for the determination of flows in the above. These design flow criteria may be modified for specific proposals as appropriate to address unusual fish passage requirements, where other approved methods of empirical analysis are provided, or where the fish passage provisions of other special facilities are approved by ODFW. Construction Considerations Culverts and associated fill shall be designed using standard engineering design practices to maintain structural integrity to the 100-year flow with consideration of the debris loading likely to encountered. Exception may be granted if the applicant provides justification for a different flow level or a design that routes high flows past the culvert without jeopard'ig the culvert or associated fill. Disturbance of the bed and banks shall be limited to that necessary to place the culvert and any required channel modification associated with the installation. Culverts shall only be approved for installation in spawning areas where full replacement of impacted habitat is provided by the applicant. Culverts shall be designed and constructed to avoid inlet scouring and shall be designed in a manner to prevent erosion of streambanks downstream of the project. Additional Conditions--For all above-referenced structure types: Alteration or disturbance of bank or bank vegetation during construction shall be limited to that necessary to construct the project. All disturbed areas shall be protected from erosion within seven (7)aalendar days bf completion of the project using vegetation or other means. The banks shall be revegetated within one year with native or other approved woody plant species. Live stakes shall be planed at a maximum interval of three feet (on center) and maintained as necessary to three years to ensure 80 % survival. The requirement to establish woody vegetation may be waived for areas where the potential for natural revegetation is adequate, or where other engineering or s&ty factors need t3 be considered. Approved structures shall be installed in the dry whenever possible. Where significant live flow exists, isolation from stream flow by the installation sf a bypass channel, flume or culvert, or by pumping the stream flow around the work area may be required. Exception may be granted if siltation or turbidity is reduced by approved means as proposed by the project designer/constructor. Any fish stranded in the construction area or diversion reach shall be safely removed to the flowing stream. Any wastewater from project activities and dewatering shall be routed to an area outside the ordinary high water line to allow settling of fine sediments and other contaminants prior to being discharged back into the subject stream. If in-water excavation is anticipated, timing of same shali conform to Oregon Guidelinesfor Timing of In- Water Work to Protect Fish and MlJlife Resources (Appendix E). APPENDIX E 'OREGON GUIDELINES FOR TIMING OF IN-WATER WORK TO PROTECT FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES WATERWAY PREFERRED WORK PERIOD Columbia Reeion Columbia River Estuary November 1 - February 28 Columbia River (to Bonneville Dam) November 1 -February 28 Youngs River & tributaries June 15 - September 15 Lewis & Clark River & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Walluski River & tributaries June 15 - September 15 Klaskanine River & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Bear Creek & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Big Creek & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Gnat Creek & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Plympton Creek & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Clatskanie River & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Other Columbia River tributaries to St. Helens June 15 - September 15 Sandy River & tributaries July 15 -August31 Tanner Creek & tributaries July 15 -August 15 Other Columbia River Cribs (Sandy R. to Herman Creek) July 15 - August 3 1 Willamette River (Harrisburg to Willamette Falls) June 1 -August31 Willamette R. (Will. Falls to mouth, incl. Mult. Channel) May 16 - January 3 1 Milton Creek & tributaries July 15 - August31 Scappoose Creek & tributaries July 15 - August 3 1 Clackamas River & tributaries July 15 - August 3 1 Tryon Creek & tributaries July 15 - September 30 Johnson Creek & tributaries (above Gresham) July 15 - August31 Johnson Creek (below Gresham) June 1 -August31 Johnson Creek (tributaries below Gresham) July 15 - August31 KeUogg Creek & tributaries July 1 - September 30 Abernethy Creel< & tributaries July 15 - September 30 Beaver Creek & tributaries July 1 - September 30 Tualatin River (below Scoggins Creek) June 1 - September 30 Tualatin River (above Scoggins Creek) July 1 - Septernba 30 Tualatin River tributaries July 1 -September30 Coastal tributaries south to Nehalem Bay July 1 - Septernba 30 Necanicum River & tributaries Nehalem Bay NovemberJuly l5 1 -5 September30ebruary 15 Nehalem River July 1 - August31 North Fork Nehalem River & tributaries July 1 - August 3 1 Cook Creek & tributaries July 15 - August31 '~bsenceof a particular listing does not imply guidelines do not exist or would not be developed and applied on a case-by-case basis. In general, unless othenvise indicated, tributaries to waterways will have the same timing as the mainstream of the waterway. L . Salmonberry River July 1 5 - August 3 1 Other Nehalem River tributaries July 1 - August 3 1 Tillanlook Bay November l - February 15 Miami River July I - September 15 lblchis hvei July l - September 15 Wilson River July I - September 15 Trask River July 1 - September 15 Tillarnook River July 1 - September 15 Netarts Bay November 1 - February 15 Sand Lake November 1 - February 15 Nestucca Bay November 1 - February 15 Nestucca Rivg July 1 - September 15 Little Nestucca River July I - September 15 Neskowin Creek July 1 - September 15 Northwest Region Willamette River (below Harrisburg) June 1 - August 3 1 Molalla River (below Molalla) June 1 - August 3 1 Molalla River (above Molalla & tributaries) July 15 -August31 wingRiver June 1 - August 3 1 Rock Creek July 15 - October 1 Butte Creek July 15 - October 1 Abiqua Creek July 15 -August31 Silver Creek July 15 - October 1 Yamhill River July 1 - October 1- North Fork & tributaries July 1 - October 1 South Fork & tributaries July 1 - October 1 Rickreal Creek & tributaries July I - October 1 Mill Creek (Salem) June 1 - August 3 1 Shelton Ditch June 1 -August31 Santiam River June 15 -August 31 South Santiam (below Lebanon) June 15 - August 3 1 Crabtree Creek July 15 -August31 Roaring River Creek July 15 -August31 Thomas Creek July 15 - August31 South Santiam (Lebanon to Foster Dam) July 1 - August 3 1 South Santiam (above Foster Dam) September 10 - October 15 Middle Santiam River July 1 - September 15 Quartzville Creek July 1 - September 15 North Santiam (below Stayton) June 15 - August 3 1 North Santiam (Stayton to Big ClifYDarn) July 15 -August31 North Santiam (above Big CWDarn) September 10 - October 15 Breitenbush hver September 10 - October 15 Luckiamute River & tributaries July 1 - October 1 Calapooia River (below Brownsville) & tributaries June I - September 15 Calapooia River (above Brownsville) & tributaries July 15 -August31 Marys River & tributaries July 1 - October 1 Long Tom River & tributaries July 1 - October 1 Willamettc River (above Hanisburg) July 1 -August 31 McKenzie River (below Blue River) July 15 -August31 McKenzie River (above Blue River) July 15 -August 15 Middle Fork Willamette River (below Dexter Dam) July 15 -August31 Middle Fork Willamette river (above Dexter Dam) July I -October1 Middle Fork Willamette River tributaries July 15 - September 15 Middle Fork Willamette River (above Hills Creek Res.) July 15 -August 15 Coast Fork Willamette River July 1 -October 1 Row River July I -September 1s Salmon River Estuary September 15 -January IS Salmon River ' July 1 - Septemk 15 Devils Lake June 15 - April 1 Silek Bay September 15 - January 15 Silek River July 1 - September 15 North Fork Silek River July 1 - September 15 Yaquina Bay September 15 - January 15 Yaquina River (non-tidal) July 1 - September 15 Yaquina River (tidewater) May 15 - September 15 4 WATERWAY PREFERRED WORK PERIOD Alsea Bay September 15 -January 15 Alsea River July I - September 15 Yachats River & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Tenmile Creek July 1 - September 15 Big Creek July 1 - September 15 Cape Creek July 1 - September 15 Siuslaw Bay September 15 - January 15 Siuslaw River & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Cummins Creek July 1 - Septembet 15 Bob Creek July 1 - September 15 Sutton Creek system July 1 - September 1S Siltcoos Lake system July 1 - September 15 Tahkenitch Lake system July 1 - September 15 Ocean tributaries July I - September 1 Umpqua Bay October 1 - Janrlary 3 1 Umpqua River July 1 - September 15 Smith River July 1 - September 15 Elk Creek July 1 - September 15 Calapooya Creek July 1 - September 15 North Umpqua River (below Soda Springs Dam) by specific arrangement North Umpqua River (above Soda Springs Dam) July 1 - September 15 South Umpqua River July 1 - September 15 Cow Creek July 1 - September 15 Coos Bay October 1 - January 3 1 Coos River October I - March 3 1 Millicoma River (tidewater) October 1 - March 3 1 East and West Forks July 1 - September 15 South Fork Coos River (tidewater) October 1 - March 3 1 South Fork Coos River July I - September 15 Coquille River Estuary October 1 - January 3 1 Coquille River (above Coquille) October 1 - March 3 1 Coquille River tributaries July I - September 15 Tenmile Creek October 1 - March 31 Tenmile Lake tributaries July I - September 15 Floras Creek July 15 - Septemba 15 Sixes River July 15 - September 15 Elk River July 15 - September 15 Euchre Creek July 15 -September 15 Rogue River l3tuq October 15 - April 1 Rogue River (below Agness) July 15 - October 15 Rogue River (above Agness) June 15 - August31 Illinois River June 1s-September15 Applegate River July1 -September15 Jumpoff Joe Creek June 15 - September 15 Evans Creek June15-September15 Bear Creek June 15 - September 15 Little Butte Creek June 15 - September IS Big Butte Creek June IS - September 15 Elk Creek June 15 -September 1s All other Rogue River tributaries June 15 - September 15 Hunter Creek July 15 - August31 Pistol River July 15 - September IS Chetco River Estuary October 1 -May31 Chetco River July I - October 1 Winchuck River July 15 - September 15 Central Repion Columbia River (Bo~evilleto John Day Dam) November 15 - March 15 - Hood River & tributaries July 1S - August 3 1 fi Mill Creek July 1 - September 30 Fifteen mile Creek July 1 - September 30 Deschutes River (below Pelton Dam) February I - March 15 Deschutes R. (Pelton Dam through Lk. Billy Chinook) July 15 - March 3 1 Deschutes Rrver (Lake Billy Chmook to Rend) July 1 - September 30 Deschutes River (Bend-North Canal Dam to Benham Falls) July 1 - April 1 Deschutes River (Eienhan Falls to Wickiup Dam) July 1 - September 30 Deschutes River (Wickiup Res. to Crane Prairie Dam) March 1 - August 3 1 Deschutes River (Crane Prairie Res. to Little Lava Lk) July 1 - August 3 1 White River & tributaries July 1 - September 30 Bakeoven Creek July 1 - September 30 Buckhollow Creek , July 1 - September 30 Trout Creek July 1 - September 30 Metolius River & tribs No in-water work except on case-by-case basis Lake Creek July 1 - September 30 Spring Creek February 1 - August 3 1 Crooked River (below Prineville Dam) July 15 - March 3 1 Prineville Reservoir July 15 -March 31 Crooked River (above Prineville Dam) July 1 - October 3 1 N.Fk. Crooked R. iribs above B. Summit Prairie Jdy i - Seprnber 30 Little Deschutes July 1 - September 30 Crescent Creek July 1 - September 30 Squaw Creek Oleadwaters to Sisters) July 1 - October 15 Squaw Creek (Sisters to Deschutes River) April 15 - October 15 Tumalo Creek July 1 - October 15 Fall River July 1 - September 30 Spring River March 1 - September 30 Klarnath River (below Keno) August 1 - March 15 Klarnath River (above Keno) July 1 - March 3 1 Lost River July 1 - March 3 1 Williamson River August 15 - September 30 Sprague River August 15 - September 30 Sycan River August 1 - September 30 Wood River August 1 - September 30 Sevenmile Creek August 1 - September 30 Northeast Reeion Columbia River (John Day Dam upstream) December 1 - March 3 1 John Day River (below John Day) July 15 -August 31 John Day River (above John Day) July 15 -August 15 Rock Creek July 15 -August 31 Bridge Creek July 15 - August 3 1 North Fork John Day River (below U.S. 395) July 15 -August31 North Fork John Day River (above U.S. 395) JU~Y15 - ~ugust15 Wall Creek July 15-August31 Middle Fork John Day River (below U.S. 395) July I5 -August31 Middle Fork John Day kver (above U.S. 395) July 15 - August31 Long Creek July 15 -August 31 Camp Creek July 15 -August31 Camas Creek July 15-August31 Desolation Creek July 15 -August31 Granite Creek July 15- August 15 South Fork John Day River July 15 -August31 Beech Creek July 15 -August31 Canyon Creek July 15 -August31 Reynolds Creek July 15 -August31 Deadorf Creek July 15 -August31 Umatilla River @elow Pendleton) July15-October15 Umatilla River (Pendleton to Meacham Creek) July I -0ctobcr 15 Birch Crtek July 1 - December 3 1 McKay Creek (below reservoir) October 1 - April 1 McKay Creek (above reservoir) July 1 - December 3 1 Meacham Creek July1 -August15 Umatilla River (above Meacham Creek) July 1 - August 15 Walla Walla River July 1 - November 1 North Fork Walla Walla River July 1 - December 3 1 > t WATERWAY PREFERRED WORK PERIOD South Fork Walla Walla River July I - December 3 1 Grande Ronde River (below Wallowa River) & tribs July 15 - September 15 Grande Ronde River (Wallowa aver to LaGrande) & tnbs July I - November 15 Grande Ronde River (above LaGrande) & tributaries July I - August 1 Wenaha River July 15 -August 15 Wallowa River & tributaries July 1 5 - August 15 Minam River July I - August 15 Bear Creek I July 15 -August 15 .Lostine River July 15 -August 15 Hurricane Creek July 15 -August 15 Lookingglass Creek July I - August 15 Catherine Creek July I -August 15 Imnaha River July 15 -August 15 Big Sheep Creek JUIY IS - ~ugust1s Little Sheep Creek July 15 - Apd 1 Joseph Creek & tributaries July 15 - April 1 Powder River July 1 - October 3 1 Eagle Creek July 1 - October 3 1 Pine Creek July 1 - October 3 1 Burnt Creek July 1 - October 3 I Southeast Region Summer Lake & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Goose Lake tributaries July I - September 15 Warner Valley tributaries July 1 - September 15 Chewaucan River & tributaries July 1 - September 15 Silver Lake tributaries July 1 - September 15 Silvies River & tributaries August 1 - March 3 1 Steens Mountain streams August 1 - March 3 1 Catlow Valley tributaries August 1 - March 3 1 Snake River November 1 - April 30 Malheur River (below Namorf Dam) August I - April 15 Willow Creek & tributaries October 1 - April 15 Bully Creek August I - April 15 Malheur River (Warm Springs Dam to Namorf Dam) December 1 - April 15 North Fork Malheur & tributaries November 1 - April 15 South Fork Malheur August I - April 15 Malheur River (above Warm Springs Dam) & tributaries November 1 - March 3 1 Owyhee River November 1 - March 3 1 Succor Creek December 1 - March 3 1 Trout Creek Mountains streams November 1 - March 3 1 Silver Creek & tributaries October I - April 15 For more information contact: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife A1 Mirati Habitat Conservation Division 250 1 S.W. First Avenue P.O. Box 59 Portland, OR 97207 (503) 229-6967 Appendix 8 ACRONYM DEFINITIONS (to be added at a later date)