Multi-Modal Transportation & Connectivity

MEETING SUMMARY

Multi-Modal Transportation & Connectivity A Community Discussion on the Highway 126 Fern Ridge Corridor Plan Tuesday, July 26, 10:30 am – 12:00 pm Eugene Public Library

Participants: Peter Coffey, , , Savannah Crawford, Heidi Beierle, Mike Russell, Lee Shoemaker, John Evans, Natalie Shiffler, Rand Stamm, Theresa Brand, Ken Augustson, Charles Ruff, Brad Coy, Ellen Teninty, Julie Fischer, Chris Watchie

I. Welcome and Introductions Dan Fricke, Project Manager, Oregon Department of Transportation

II. Presentation: Public Involvement and Project Overview Julie Fischer, Cogito Peter Coffey and Brad Coy, DKS Associates

III. Barriers & Solutions Discussion/Questions Q: There have been studies before this. How does it relate? Is this a new effort or continuation? A: Past studies identified deficiencies that we are now looking for solutions. This is a new effort, but not discounting past work. It will build off of it. Q: What about the fact that the wetland hems in this project? That is the central issue. Q: If we can’t widen can we put on structure? Cost issues should be addressed up front. Q: Who owns Cantrell and Perkins roads? A: Lane County  There are many requests to connect bike system [from Fern Ridge bike path to Veneta].  City of Eugene is currently updating their Bike/Ped Master Plan. Greenhill Road has proposed changes that might move forward with a multi-use path which would provide an important connection.  There needs to be bike connection [from Fern Ridge] to Clear Lake Road.  There’s a good connection to Territorial Road—but it needs to be widen to make better safer bike lane.  Potential for Clear Lake Rd connection is greater if Eugene does the Greenhill multi-use path. Q: Why do you stop project area where you do? A: Multiple reasons:  This is an important [area] to the east because of the potential to extend EmX route.  Traffic data collected in June.  Freight movement represents 3-5% of daily traffic volume with very low ped and bike usage.

http://highway126.org  The collision data is based on every tenth of a mile, thus it may not correctly reflect the exact location of actual crashes.  Most serious collisions occur where there are turns happening. More towards Eugene.  Central and Greenhill roads account for greatest amount of accidents Q: Were there any pedestrian or bicycle with vehicle accidents? Do you have that data? A: There have been a handful of pedestrian and bicycle accidents.  Data reflects that most accidents are called fixed object collisions where someone goes into ditch. A lot to do with passing (overtaking). Specifically, passing when someone is waiting to turn is 40%,  Rear-end is 20%, Turning is 20%; Running off the road is 20% other.  This data is consistent with statewide statistics. Q: The data doesn’t show the roadway experiencing pedestrian/bicycle usage. So how risky is it? Stats might reflect that it is too dangerous to be out there. A: You are right. This is something the data can’t tell us. Q: Would historical data provide another way to try to understand this?  There is a seasonal effect on bicycle and pedestrian volumes. The Country Fair would reflect higher numbers for bike-ped.  The City of Eugene has bicycle counts as far as Danebo Rd.  The Country Fair does not have bicycle counts from attendance only bus ridership. Q: What is the frequency of bus service on a daily basis? A: Four daily roundtrips with 330 boardings per day with 100 people boarding west of Greenhill Q: Is there any Park and Ride data yet? A: Data collection will happen next spring. There are two park and ride lots. The new one and one in the shopping center. Q: What’s the history of a bike route on Cantrell? A: Public comments were made to Lane County’s Roads Advisory Committee in support of paving the road. It has gravel portions because of seasonal flooding. It has large gravel that gets carried away every year. There are many wetland and environmental issues. It would need a long bridge structure to allow for seasonal flow. Financing could prove challenging. Q: Can you raise the level of road? A: No because we can’t use culverts to make it functional. We also can’t impact upstream or downstream flow. Would have to be on piers.  Could be cheaper to do that than 126 widening.  The City of Eugene Bike Ped Master Plan calls for striped bike lanes on Greenhill (inside City of Eugene’s UGB). However, the County is recommending multi-use path instead because there isn’t enough right of way.  I live on Suttle Rd. It’s personal for me. I ride bike in regularly. I have taken all of these roads many times and I avoid Highway 126 like the plague. Cantrell would be OK, if paved. Territorial is as frightening as Hwy 126. Can’t do all three modes (bike, walk, vehicle) on this roadway. If you could do rails to trails that would be meaningful, but you can’t. Lower route of Cantrell and Perkins with wider land for bikes makes more sense than trying to make Hwy. 126 work for bikes. Clear Lake is already a great bike route. Greenhill and Territorial roads need major help. South route is probably most cost effective. Touring bikers who don’t know what they are doing end up on Hwy. 126. Can’t say strongly enough how much we want this to happen. More apparent to me than ever that you just can’t make 126 pleasant enough to use for bicyclists.  I am also daily bike commuter. I go Fern Ridge path. I have to do Chambers many mornings

http://highway126.org 2 and it is so unpleasant.  Territorial is an ODOT facility but might be transferred to County. We are looking at how to find federal money to make some much-needed improvements.  I take Territorial and Clear Lake, which gives me 5 more miles. It’s a lesser of three evils.  I want to echo sentiments and come back to recreational tourism and benefits of different routes. So much easier and friendly for tourists, if they could see how to go.  Scenic bike route along Cantrell would be good. Think of the opportunity to tie economics environment and recreation together. Q: How do you feel about Ken Neilsen Road? A: Existing Trans Plan has a route that goes around Fern Ridge to it. It’s a County project but the City of Eugene owns the right of way. Fir Butte connects to Greenhill. How do we get around reservoir? Could go around to the north. Greenhill need to have bike lanes from Hwy 126 to the airport.  Greenhill is just as bad as Territorial. Meadowlark to Oak Hill is smaller piece.  Look at Rivers to Ridges plan and you will see something there.  It is really treacherous for kayakers crossing Hwy 126. Think about improving the put in (boat launch) locations - even the informal one by osprey nest on right. Q: For Lane County, has Perkins Peninsula Park had access difficulty for pedestrians and bicycles? A: There really isn’t any walking to park. It’s either by bike or vehicle. The park is a diamond in the rough. Great place to put in boat. Not developed. People tend to park outside the gate in the area that ODOT owns to beat the park vehicle fee. Q: Are there any planned improvements? A: Lane County is currently updating the Parks Plan now. Not sure what is in store for Perkins. Q: Has the idea of an elevated path for Cantrell come up before for Lane County? A Since we don’t have funding, it is always about road improvement. Q: What about the connectivity between modes? Barriers to consider? A: As EMX project manager, I see employment development as the justification for EmX expansion. That would provide the needed justification. To make connectivity work, we will do whatever we can to enhance transit option or park and ride as viable option. Q: Do people use Central/Hwy 126 (Perkins Park area) as Park and Ride? A: Some park in shopping center. I don’t think they do use Perkins as a Park and Ride when I have looked.  We have seen 6-10 vehicles using Ellmaker. Could indicate that people have to cross the street to the transit stop.  I have seen no evidence people are using Central as a Park & Ride. Think it is mainly recreation users perhaps.  The stop at Ellmaker is a terrible location for loading. Not a well-designed location  For mixed modes the issue with rural route buses is the lack bike capacity. LTD tries to provide space for three bikes in front and allows bikes on bus, but still this is iffy.  It would be good to look at secured bike parking in Veneta. If you want people to use mixed modes have to make it work for them to do it.  Plan calls for bike lanes and sidewalks at Greenhill. Q: For EmX, are you looking for dedicated lane on 126 in the future? A: Too early to say. At this point, we would be glad if ODOT does the intersection analysis.  The logical terminus is at Terry. You would have to widen highway there if not done already. It would reopen wetland issue (Terry to Greenhill). Ultimately if there is a joint state/federal plan for long term needs of wetlands and roadway, we would want to extend the analysis to the West Eugene employment area.

http://highway126.org 3  We are excited about new transit station, but would like full turnout lane, but the problem is crossing the street in the Ellmaker section. I think about people making that treacherous crossing. No crosswalk. Nothing. Could you slow it down from 55 to 35 MPH between Huston to Ellmaker? Q: What about transportation for people with disabilities and seniors? A: Area is outside of the district. Currently, we wouldn’t look at this. Paratransit is destination oriented.  If we increased existing routes from eight to ten trips/day, we would then become a fixed route and require complimentary paratransit service.  It becomes a very expensive proposition ($3 on bus vs. $29 on paratransit). Q: What about the walkability & bikeability from Ellmaker to town? What do they plan to do with that area of town?  Why are people taking bikes on that route? For use in Eugene? Maybe we could have bikes available on the Eugene side people could use.  It is the last mile issue for transit. That is, to get from bus route to one’s destination. Complicated to do bike sharing. Q: How many bikes are being turned down on 126 bus route now? A: No data for that.

Final Comments:  This is the second in a series of four focus groups.  A summary of this discussion will be available and sent to all participants.  In early autumn, the project will host a public forum on initial findings. For a project description, visit http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/REGION2/OR126W_Over- view.shtml.

To contact the project, email Julie Fischer at [email protected] or call at 541-556-6654

http://highway126.org 4 Focus Group Invitees

Ken Augustson LTD Service Planning Heidi Beierle Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, City of Eugene Theresa Brand p2p Solutions Savannah Crawford ODOT John Evans LTD, EmX Bob Fletcher GEARS (Greater Eugene Area Riders) Dan Fricke ODOT Ric Ingham Veneta City Administrator Lydia McKinney Lane County Transportation Planning Holly McRae Former WREN staff Mike Russell Lane County Parks Terry Parker LTD Accessible Services Rand Stamm LTD Accessible Services Natalie Shiffler LTD Transportation Planning Charles Ruff Oregon Country Fair Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, City of Eugene, Tom Schneider former WREN board Tom Schwetz LTD, Development Services Lee Shoemaker Eugene Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Staff Maeve Sowles Lane County Audubon Society President Jim Wilcox Bike Lane County

http://highway126.org 5