DOCSLIB.ORG

Transforming Alleys Into Green Infrastructure for Los Angeles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transforming Alleys Into Green Infrastructure for Los Angeles June 2008 Transforming Alleys into Green Infrastructure for Los Angeles Arly Cassidy Josh Newell Jennifer Wolch © 2008 by the Center for Sustainable Cities University of Southern California 3620 S. Vermont Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90089‐0255 www.usc.edu/sustainablecities Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation. We would also like to express our gratitude to Kim Reynolds, Travis Longcore, Joseph Devinny, Hilary Bradbury, Mona Seymour, Jennifer Mapes, Zaria Tatalovic, Greg Elwood, Mia Costa, Rachel Bramwell, Ari Briski, Michael Schreiber, and Ross Stephenson as well as our community partners TreePeople, Trust for Public Land, Pacoima Beautiful, and the Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust. Preferred Citation: Cassidy, A., Newell, J., and J. Wolch. 2008. Transforming Alleys into Green Infrastructure for Los Angeles. Los Angeles, CA: USC Center for Sustainable Cities. About the Center for Sustainable Cities The USC Center for Sustainable Cities (CSC) fosters research, education, and partnerships to address the sustainability challenges facing metropolitan regions, and generates innovative solutions that enhance the natural environment, economic vitality, and social equity of cities worldwide. CSC regularly partners with community‐based nonprofit organizations, as well as USC’s Institute for Prevention Research, on projects that highlight the role of parks and open‐space and recreation in increasing physical activity and improving public health, particularly in park‐poor neighborhoods. In 2007, CSC conducted an exhaustive study of the physical characteristics and usage patterns of more than 300 alleys across the city of Los Angeles. CONTENTS Contents ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... vi Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... vii Report Structure ......................................................................................................................................... ix Useful Terms ................................................................................................................................................ x I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 II. Alleys In the City of Los Angeles ................................................................................................ 5 Alley Use ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Primary Users ............................................................................................................................................. 9 Challenges to Greening Alleys .................................................................................................................. 12 III. Case Studies: Programs in other Cities .................................................................................... 13 Chicago ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 How the Program was Developed ........................................................................................................ 14 Challenges ............................................................................................................................................ 16 Results and Future Directions............................................................................................................... 16 Seattle ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 How the Program was Developed ........................................................................................................ 17 Challenges ............................................................................................................................................ 18 Results & Future Directions .................................................................................................................. 19 Baltimore .................................................................................................................................................. 21 How the Ordinance was Developed ..................................................................................................... 21 Challenges ............................................................................................................................................ 24 Results & Future Directions .................................................................................................................. 24 Vancouver ................................................................................................................................................. 25 How the Program was Developed ........................................................................................................ 25 Challenges ............................................................................................................................................ 27 Results & Future Directions .................................................................................................................. 27 IV. Creating a Green Alley Program in Los Angeles....................................................................... 28 Establishing a Process ........................................................................................................................... 28 Measuring Results ................................................................................................................................ 28 Funding & Maintenance ....................................................................................................................... 29 Alley Redesign ...................................................................................................................................... 29 Policy Reform............................................................................................................................................ 30 Immediate Steps ................................................................................................................................... 30 Short‐Term Steps (1 to 3 years) ............................................................................................................ 30 Long‐Term Steps (3 to 6 years) ............................................................................................................. 32 A Pilot Project: The Wilmington Green Alley ............................................................................................ 34 V. Appendixes .............................................................................................................................. 36 Appendix A: How to Lead an Alley Revitalization Event ........................................................................... 36 Project Readiness Checklist .................................................................................................................. 36 Steps to a Successful Project ................................................................................................................ 37 Timeline ................................................................................................................................................ 39 Important Contacts............................................................................................................................... 42 Appendix B: Baltimore’s Gating and Greening Process ............................................................................ 46 Appendix C: Focus Group Summaries ...................................................................................................... 47 Pacoima ................................................................................................................................................ 47 Sun Valley ............................................................................................................................................. 47 South Los Angeles ................................................................................................................................. 47 Hollywood ............................................................................................................................................. 48 Wilmington ........................................................................................................................................... 48 Appendix D: Basic Contacts and Resources .............................................................................................. 50 Los Angeles ..........................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Citizens Guide 5/8FINAL
    THE CONSERVATION-MINDED CITIZEN’S GUIDE TO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING How to Get Involved in Minimizing The Impacts of Roads on Florida’s Wildlife 1 May 2003 Acknowledgments Defenders of Wildlife is grateful to the Elizabeth Ordway Dunn Foundation for making this project possible. Our thanks to Bob Romig of the Florida Department of Transportation, Louise Fragala of Powell, Fragala and Associates, Tom Turton of URS Corporation and Laurie Macdonald and Laura Hood Watchman of Defenders of Wildlife for reviewing and improving the manuscript. Author: Jennifer McMurtray Editors: Tim Baker, Kate Davies Production Manager: Kate Davies Designer: Cissy Russell About Defenders of Wildlife Defenders of Wildlife is a leading conservation organization recognized as one of the nation’s most progressive advocates for wildlife and its habitat. Defenders uses education, litigation, research and promotion of conservation policies to protect wild animals and plants in their natural communities. Known for its effective lead- ership on endangered species issues, Defenders also advocates new approaches to wildlife conservation that protect species before they become endangered. Founded in 1947, Defenders of Wildlife is a 501(c)(3) membership organization with headquarters in Washington, D.C. and 450,000 members nationwide. Through its Habitat and Highways Campaign, Defenders works with state and local authorities and the public to reduce the impacts of roads on wildlife and habitat by 1) calling for modifications to existing roads where necessary to main- tain habitat connectivity and to allow wildlife to cross safely; and 2) ensuring that wildlife conservation and habitat preservation are an integral part of trans- portation planning. Visit www.defenders.org/habitat/highways, the Habitat and Highways web page, for detailed information on transportation and wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • HOOD COUNTY MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM UPDATED: September 14, 2021
    HOOD COUNTY MAINTAINED ROAD SYSTEM UPDATED: September 14, 2021 ROAD NAME SUBDIVISION FROM TO CR ABERDEEN DRIVE HIGHLAND LAKES Edinburgh Drive County Line CR ACORN RUN NASSAU BAY II Davis Road Arrowhead Lane CR ACTON HIGHWAY City Limits FM 4 South CR ACTON MEADOWS COURT ACTON MEADOWS FM 167 South Cul-de-sac CR ACTON SCHOOL ROAD FM 4 South North Gate Road CR ADAMS STREET THORP SPRING Clay Street Caraway Street CR ALBATROSS DRIVE WHIPPOORWILL BAY Skylark Drive Skylark Drive CR ALEMAN STREET ROLLING HILLS SHORES Indian Gap Street Blue Ridge Road CR ALEXA COURT SUMMERLIN ADDITION Summerlin Drive Cul-de-sac CR ALLEN COURT ANDREWS ADDITION Andrews Court Dead End CR-115 ALLISON COURT FM 1189 North End of Maintenance CR-407B ALTA VISTA COURT ALTA VISTA Meander Road Cul-de-sac CR AMBER COURT HIDDEN VALLEY ESTATES Spring Court Cul-de-sac CR AMBLING WAY COURT MEANDER ESTATES Saunter Lane Cul-de-sac CR ANDREWS CIRCLE ANDREWS ADDITION Allen Court Allen Court CR ANDREWS COURT ANDREWS ADDITION Loop 567 Allen Court CR APOLLO COURT SKY HARBOUR Sky Harbour Drive Dead End CR APPLE TREE COURT LAKE GRANBURY ESTATES Hilltop Road Cul-de-sac CR AQUA VISTA COURT LAGUNA VISTA Aqua Vista Drive Cul-de-sac CR-423 AQUA VISTA DRIVE LAGUNA VISTA FM 51 North Cul-de-sac CR AQUARIUS COURT EAST SKY HARBOUR Sky Harbour Drive Sky Harbour Drive CR AQUARIUS COURT WEST SKY HARBOUR Sky Harbour Drive Cul-de-sac CR-116 ARANSAS COURT HILL COUNTRY FM 4 North Dead End CR ARCHERY COURT LAKE GRANBURY HARBOR Washington Trail Cul-de-sac CR ARKANSAS RIVER DRIVE COMANCHE COVE Brazos River
    [Show full text]
  • Neighborhood Investment Strategy
    PLAN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT’s GARFIELDNEIGHBORHOOD INVESTMENT STRATEGY BLOOMFIELD GARFIELD CORPORATION GARFIELD JUBILEE ASSOCIATION Prepared by: Perkins Eastman TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Process ........................................................................................................................... 1 Good Houses ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Great Streets ..................................................................................................................................... 29 Hilltop Park ....................................................................................................................................... 47 Community Greens .......................................................................................................................... 57 PURPOSE AND PROCESS Garfi eld’s 2030 Plan Garfi eld is looking to become a neighborhood of as encompassing the ideas or viewpoints of all who choice by 2030. To be a place that readily attracts ho- call Garfi eld home. The 2030 Plan is available on the meowners and tenants alike as residents, it must ef- Bloomfi eld-Garfi eld Corporation’s website, fectively deal with the aftermath of nearly 40 years of www.bloomfi eld-garfi eld.org. disinvestment. This means creating a new and valued community that offers high-quality urban living in a The purpose of Garfi eld’s 2030 Plan is to strive for a well-kept environment. Much has been accomplished
    [Show full text]
  • Country Lane Intermediate
    2018 SCHOOL PROFILES Office of Educational Quality and Accountability 840 Research Parkway, Suite 455, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104 (405) 522 -5399 Fax: (405) 525-0373 Web: http://www.EdProfiles.info COUNTRY LANE INTERMEDIATE ELEMENTARY (3-5) Classroom & Administration Characteristics BROKEN ARROW PUBLIC SCHOOLS 251 East Omaha Street, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 Telephone: (918) 449-5600 72-I003-180 Community Characteristics About this District: Community Group BROKEN ARROW Square Miles Covered by District: 105 Number of School Sites in District: 26 Telephone: (918) 259-5700 B1 701 South Main Street Broken Arrow, OK 74012-5528 County: TULSA Community Socioeconomic Data School District Group Average State Average High School Curriculum (Only for HS with 12th Grade) Ethnic Makeup Based upon Fall Enrollment: Caucasian 56.9% 60.9% 57.1% 48.9% Black 7.2% 5.7% 7.2% 8.6% Asian 6.2% 3.4% 5.5% 2.4% Hispanic 14.1% 12.7% 13.4% 17.2% Native American 6.9% 8.3% 4.9% 13.6% Two or More Races 8.8% 9.1% 11.9% 9.3% Average Property Valuation per Student DNS $46,933 $57,719 $52,219 Students Eligible for Free/Reduced Lunch 32.0% 46.3% 40.6% 62.9% U.S. Census Data (American Community Survey 2013-2017 5-Year Estimate) District Population 107,659 105,996 7,610 % of Population under 18 26.7% 24.5% 24.5% % of Children under 18 Living in Married-Couple Household 73.6% 75.0% 65.6% Average Household Income $83,441 $88,790 $67,682 Median Household Income $69,113 DNS $49,767 Sources of District Revenues (All Funds) % of Population below Poverty 7.5% 9.7% 16.2% Unemployment Rate 4.7% 4.2% 5.7% Highest Educational Level for Adults Age 25+ Without H.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuxedo Farms Smart Code
    TUXEDO FARMS SMARTCODE V9.2 Approved November 2010 Update Approved April 2015 This page intentionally left blank SMARTCODE TABLE OF CONTENTS Tuxedo Farms, Orange County, New York INTRODUCTION ARTICLE 4. STANDARDS AND TABLES ARTICLE 1. AUTHORITY TABLE 1 TRANSECT ZONE SUMMARY TABLE 2 PRIVATE FRONTAGES 1.1 AUTHORITY TABLE 3 DEFINITIONS ILLUSTRATED 1.2 INTERPRETATION TABLE 4 BUILDING CONFIGURATION 1.3 ADMINISTRATION AND WAIVERS TABLE 5 BUILDING PLACEMENT 1.4 REGULATING PLANS & TABLE 6 BUILDING TYPES TRANSECT ZONES TABLE 7 BUILDING BULK STANDARDS TABLE 8 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES ARTICLE 2. GENERAL PROVISIONS TABLE 9 PUBLIC LIGHTING TABLE 10 PUBLIC PLANTING 2.1 INTRODUCTION TABLE 11 CIVIC SPACE 2.2 BUILDING TYPES 2.3 BUILDING USE ARTICLE 5. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 2.4 BUILDING PLACEMENT 2.5 BUILDING CONFIGURATION CHECKLIST FOR BUILDINGS 2.6 PARKING 2.7 CIVIC SPACES/BUILDINGS 2.8 THOROUGHFARE STANDARDS 2.9 PUBLIC FRONTAGES 2.10 SIGNAGE STANDARDS 2.11 LANDSCAPE STANDARDS 2.12 ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS ARTICLE 3. REGULATING PLANS SC A-1 REGULATING PLAN SC A-2 ROAD HIERARCHY PLAN SMARTCODE VERSION 9.2 SC3 ARTICLE 1. AUTHORITY SMARTCODE Tuxedo Farms, Orange County, New York 1.1 AUTHORITY 1.1.1 The SmartCode is a component of the Design Standards applicable to the Tuxedo Farm Development. The Design Standards are appended to and incorporated by reference into the Amended and Restated Special Permit for Tuxedo Farm (“Special Permit”) adopted by the Town Board on _______,2010. Compliance with the Design Standards is required. 1.1.2 The SmartCode sets forth in one integrated manual the following standards, regulations, and guidelines applicable to Tuxedo Farm: a.
    [Show full text]
  • Interstate Access Justification
    INTERSTATE ACCESS JUSTIFICATION IH 35E FROM IH 635 (LBJ) TO US 380 CSJ NUMBERS: 0195-03-050, 0195-03-071 0196-01-056, 0196-01-074, 0196-01-096, 0196-02-068, 0196-02-073, 0196-02-114, 0196-03-138, 0196-03-180, 0196-03-240, 0196-03-245 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DALLAS DISTRICT AUGUST 2009 Interstate Access Justification for IH 35E from IH 635 (LBJ) to US 380 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................4 SECTION 1: PURPOSE AND NEED..............................................................................................7 SECTION 2: ALTERNATIVES.....................................................................................................14 Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternatives...........................................................14 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Alternatives ........................................................19 Freeway/Roadway Alternatives...................................................................................................22 SECTION 3: OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS..................................................................................32 Proposed Schematic.....................................................................................................................33 Volumes.......................................................................................................................................33 Freeway Mainlanes Analysis.......................................................................................................33
    [Show full text]
  • Pavement Management Program 2017 List of Roadway Improvements (Updated 1/2/2018)
    Pavement Management Program 2017 List of Roadway Improvements (updated 1/2/2018) Length (linear Actual Assigned Repair Date Name From To feet) Width PCI Cost Resources Strategy Completed Canton Green Road Albany Turnpike Dowd Avenue 239 33 65 $ 358.50 Vendor Crack Seal Fall Canton Valley Circle Albany Turnpike Canton Valley Circle 1,841 24 80 $ 11,244.28 Vendor/DPW Level Course / Chip Seal Summer Collins Road Torrington Avenue Dead End 1,601 18 65 $ 5,015.63 Vendor/DPW Chip Seal Summer Community Center/Library Parking Lot $ 3,500.00 Vendor Crack Seal Fall Country Lane Torrington Avenue Country Lane 5,062 26 85 $ 55,425.49 Vendor/DPW Level Coarse / Chip Seal w/drainage Summer Crown Point Dartmouth Drive Cul-De-Sac 1,999 26 80 $ 1,799.10 Vendor Crack Seal Fall East Mountain Road East Hill Road Cherry Brook Road 6,276 20 70 $ 4,958.04 Vendor Crack Seal Fall Freedom Drive Torrington Avenue Cul De Sac 3,027 24 95 $ 109,029.88 Vendor/DPW Mill / Overlay w/drainage Fall Gemstone Drive Erickson Drive Cul De Sac 405 26 65 $ 2,048.63 Vendor/DPW Level Course / Chip Seal Summer Jeff's Lane Sunrise Drive Cul-De-Sac 475 26 90 $ 712.50 Vendor Crack Seal Fall Lawton Road Albany Turnpike Washburn Road 1,711 24 80 $ 1,539.90 Vendor Crack Seal Fall Livingston Road Bart Drive Cul-De-Sac 1,495 26 80 $ 1,345.50 Vendor Crack Seal Fall Main Street/Town Hall Parking Lot Bridge Street Front Street 300 30 100 $ 3,491.82 Vendor Retainage ( Reclaim (local) Textile w/drainage) Winter Mohawk Drive Albany Turnpike Cul De Sac 2,408 26 80 $ 10,496.63 Vendor/DPW Chip Seal
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Plan Transportation Mobility Element
    COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY ELEMENT Support Document TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY ELEMENT TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY ELEMENT.............................................................1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................. 3 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS........................................................................................................ 6 POPULATION/TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS.............................................................................. 6 LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS.................................................................................. 7 STREETS AND HIGHWAYS........................................................................................................ 10 PHYSICAL CONDITION OF ROADWAYS .................................................................................... 16 ROADWAY LEVEL-OF-SERVICE ANALYSIS.............................................................................. 17 PUBLIC TRANSIT LOS ANALYSIS.............................................................................................. 27 BIKEWAYS AND PEDESTRIAN WAYS......................................................................................... 29 TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS.................................................................................................. 32 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ANALYSIS...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Out of Doors 12.12.Indd
    MARCH 2013 Affi liated with the National Wildlife Federation VOLUME 53, NUMBER 2 Camo-Coalition receiving a check from the SD Izaak Walton League Inside Chapter for their support in lobby- ing efforts (Lto R) Dave Nauman, this issue: Chris Hesla, SDWF President Rich Widman and SDIWL Trea- surer Lanny Thomas. Page 2 Thanks to the Members of the Dakota Sportsman Inc. Ikes for supporting SDWF-Camo- Sponsors kids fi shing Coalition Tournement Page 3 PRESIDENT COLUMN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S SDWF YOUTH CONSERVATION CAMP 50 YEARS UPDATE Wow, 50 years of camp and we are still going strong. Thousands servation Camp is a unique opportunity. Any student, girls Page 4-5 of young people over the years have attended and learned the or boys, in 9th, 10th or 11th grade is eligible to attend camp. lessons of conservation. The 50th annual SDWF Youth Con- CITIZENS SCIENCE Interested young people can apply directly to a local sports- servation Camp is now in the planning stage. The 2013 camp man’s club in their area or to their local Soil Conservation NOTEBOOK will run from June 2nd through June 8th. Young people from District offi ce. WINNING TICKET across South Dakota will be arriving at Camp Bob Marshall in the beautiful Black Hills. They will be learning about conserva- If you would like to view photos from the camp, join us on our Page 7 tion and striking up new friendships. The 2012 Conservation facebook page: SDWF Youth Conservation Camp. For more Camp was well attended and the programs were well received information about how you or someone you know can attend SPRING ARCHERY RESULTS by the campers.
    [Show full text]
  • 0 Barn Owls and Major Roads – the Barn Owl Trust
    0 Barn Owls and Major Roads – The Barn Owl Trust Acknowledgements The author wishes to acknowledge the cooperation and support of a wide range of individuals and a small number of organisations as follows:- Trustees of the Barn Owl Trust for their patience and support in the face of other demands on Trust resources, and for funding this study Professor Graham Martin (University of Birmingham) for acting as principal scientific advisor and Marie-Anne Martin for comments on earlier drafts Mike Toms (British Trust for Ornithology) for comments on earlier drafts and data analysis in Chapter 10 Frances Ramsden (Barn Owl Trust) for comments and desktop publishing Sandra Reardon (Barn Owl Trust) for report production Steve Panks (University of Plymouth student) for helping with chapters 2 & 3 as follows: most of the fieldwork, a first draft of some of the text and all the figures and tables Tom Day (University of York student) for help with statistical data analysis Mark Green (Barn Owl Trust) for analysis of part of the data used in Chapter 7 Jessica Munday (University of Reading student) for inputting data for Chapter 6 British Trust for Ornithology for administering the UK ringing and recovery system and providing data Jacquie Clark (British Trust for Ornithology) for data request approval and patience Deborah Lang (University of Bristol student) for inputting data Jerry Tallowin (independent BTO ringer) for providing details of Barn Owls he ringed Inigo Fajardo for help with the literature review Sian Manning for help with the literature review David Perkins (Manchester Metropolitan University) for help with the literature review David Warbey (Devon County Council) for researching and providing Devon road statistics David Hinde (Highways Agency) for providing access to an unpublished report (Shawyer & Dixon, 1999) Highways Agency for permission to use the data arising from the first survey used in Chapter 2 Nick Dixon (Hawk and Owl Trust) for details of 11 road casualties.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Lane Primary
    2019 SCHOOL PROFILES Office of Educational Quality and Accountability 840 Research Parkway, Suite 455, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104 (405) 522 -5399 Fax: (405) 525-0373 Web: http://www.EdProfiles.info COUNTRY LANE PRIMARY (EC-2) Classroom & Administration Characteristics BROKEN ARROW PUBLIC SCHOOLS 301 East Omaha Street, Broken Arrow, OK 74012 Telephone: (918) 259-4400 72-I003-170 Community Characteristics About this District: Community Group BROKEN ARROW Square Miles Covered by District: 105 Number of School Sites in District: 26 Telephone: (918) 259-5700 B1 701 South Main Street Broken Arrow, OK 74012-5528 County: TULSA Community Student Demographics School District Group Average State Average High School Curriculum (Only for HS with 12th Grade) Ethnic & Gender Makeup Based upon Fall Enrollment: Caucasian 57.9% 59.0% 54.6% 48.5% Black 8.1% 6.0% 6.1% 8.5% Asian 4.7% 3.5% 5.8% 2.4% Hispanic 11.1% 13.5% 14.8% 17.7% Native American 9.4% 8.0% 5.4% 13.1% Two or More Races 8.9% 10.0% 13.2% 9.8% Female 47.1% 48.3% 48.7% 48.7% Male 52.9% 51.7% 51.3% 51.3% Bilingual Students 12.1% 9.5% 10.5% 12.7% Economically Disadvantaged Students 29.5% 42.9% 43.3% 60.2% Average Property Valuation per Student DNS $49,823 $53,283 $55,097 U.S. Census Data (American Community Survey 2014-2018 5-Year Estimate) District Population 109,747 98,428 7,653 % of Population under 18 26.7% 24.1% 24.5% Sources of District Revenues (All Funds) % of Children under 18 Living in Married-Couple Household 73.1% 73.4% 65.4% Average Household Income $86,818 $85,552 $70,262 Median Household Income $71,328 DNS $51,424 % of Population below Poverty 7.5% 10.4% 16.0% Unemployment Rate 4.4% 4.2% 5.3% Highest Educational Level for Adults Age 25+ Without H.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Master Plan.Pdf
    Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 1 EXISTINGCONDITIONS 1 FUTUREFORECAST 2 FUTURECONDITIONS 4 PEDESTRIAN 6 BICYCLE 8 MOTORVEHICLE 10 ST SV SW FUNDINGANDIMPLEMENTATION 18 SZ S[ S[ S[ TT TT TU TU TU TV TW Gaston Transportation Master Plan Page A January 14, 2009 Introduction Motor vehicles are the primary mode for transporting goods and people within the City of Gaston. The physical roadway infrastructure and the motor vehicles it supports play a vital role in the City’s social and economic livelihood. Efficient movement of motor vehicles supports the economic vitality of the region and maintains the mobility of its residents. The City of Gaston is located along Highway 47 south of Forest Grove and north of McMinnville. Highway 47 has two travel lanes and is designated by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)1 as a Regional Highway through the City of Gaston. According to ODOT, a Regional Highway provides safe and efficient, high-speed, continuous-flow operation in rural areas and moderate to high-speed operations in urban and urbanizing areas. Highway 47 is the primary route for Gaston residents to reach places of employment. Other streets in the city have significantly lower traffic volumes than Highway 47 and are primarily local streets that serve residential areas. With the highest traffic volumes being on Highway 47, the focus of the traffic analysis was Highway 47. This Gaston Transportation Master Plan (TMP) identifies projects and programs needed to serve planned growth through the TMP horizon year (2030). The TMP builds on the previous plan that was developed in 2002 for the city, and addresses changes in local and regional growth patterns and other new issues including planned developments.
    [Show full text]