DOCSLIB.ORG

Transportation System Plan for Lincoln County, Oregon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transportation System Plan for Lincoln County, Oregon Transportation System Plan for Lincoln County, Oregon Volume 1 | Plan October 2007 Volume 1 Transportation System Plan Lincoln County, Oregon Prepared for Lincoln County Planning & Development Department and Oregon Department of Transportation October 2007 Acknowledgments The following people were instrumental in the development of this Transportation System Plan: Lincoln County Matt Spangler, Director, Planning and Development Department Jim Buisman, P.E., Director, Public Works Department Cynda Bruce, Manager, Lincoln County Transit Oregon Department of Transportation John deTar, Senior Planner, Region 2 Dorothy Upton, Senior Transportation Analyst, Transportation Planning and Analysis Unit Angela Kargel, Traffic Engineer, Region 2 Adam Roberts, Environmental Coordinator, Region 2 Robert Melbo, Rail Planner, ODOT Rail Division John Lucas, Senior Designer, Region 2 Roadway CH2M HILL Larry Weymouth, Project Manager and Planner, Corvallis Office Andra Henriques, P.E., Transportation Designer and Traffic Analyst, Portland Office Tim Newkirk, Associate Transportation Engineer, Bellevue Office Darren Muldoon, AICP, Associate Planner, Portland Office Tim Burkhardt, AICP, Senior Reviewer, Portland Office Jesse Manley, GIS Specialist, Portland Office Kathryn Westcott, Graphic Designer, Portland Office Vicki Starr, Document Processor, Corvallis Office Angelo Planning Group Serah Overbeek, Planner, Portland Office Darci Rudzinski, AICP, Planner, Portland Office Port of Newport Don Mann, General Manager Port of Toledo Bud Shoemake, General Manager Newport Municipal Airport Dennis Reno, General Manager Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians Pam Barlow Lind, Tribal Planner CVO\073990003 1 Contents Acknowledgments Page Executive Summary............................................................................................................... ES-1 Plan Development ......................................................................................................ES-1 Plan Elements and Organization..............................................................................ES-2 Plan Summary.............................................................................................................ES-2 Existing and Future Conditions and Needs ..............................................ES-5 Transportation Improvement Program......................................................ES-7 Policy Recommendations ...........................................................................ES-18 Financing Plan Recommendations............................................................ES-20 Implementation ...........................................................................................ES-21 1 Introduction..................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Setting................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.3 Goals and Objectives....................................................................................... 1-4 1.3.1 Goal #1 Mobility ................................................................................ 1-4 1.3.2 Goal #2 Livability .............................................................................. 1-5 1.3.3 Goal #3 Coordination........................................................................ 1-5 1.3.4 Goal #4 Public Transportation......................................................... 1-6 1.3.5 Goal #5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities....................................... 1-6 1.3.6 Goal #6 Accessibility......................................................................... 1-7 1.3.7 Goal #7 Environment........................................................................ 1-8 1.3.8 Goal #8 System Preservation ........................................................... 1-8 1.3.9 Goal #9 Capacity................................................................................ 1-8 1.3.10 Goal #10 Transportation Funding................................................... 1-9 1.3.11 Goal #11 Safety .................................................................................. 1-9 1.4 Transportation System Inventory ............................................................... 1-10 1.4.1 Land Use ........................................................................................... 1-10 1.4.2 Population......................................................................................... 1-12 1.4.3 Employment ..................................................................................... 1-14 1.4.4 Future Development ....................................................................... 1-16 1.4.5 Roadway Inventory......................................................................... 1-24 1.4.6 Intersections...................................................................................... 1-33 1.4.7 Pedestrian Facilities......................................................................... 1-36 1.4.8 Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................... 1-36 1.4.9 Public Transportation...................................................................... 1-37 1.4.10 Air/Rail/Water/Pipeline............................................................... 1-43 1.4.11 Emergency and Evacuation Routes............................................... 1-49 CVO\063130044 III CONTENTS CONTINUED 2 Plans and Policies Review ......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Federal............................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) ....................... 2-1 2.2.2 Siuslaw National Forest Road Analysis Report ............................ 2-2 2.3 State of Oregon................................................................................................. 2-2 2.3.1 Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) .............................................. 2-2 2.3.2 Oregon Transportation Plan (2006)................................................. 2-3 2.3.3 Oregon Highway Plan (1999)........................................................... 2-3 2.3.4 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (1995) ................................... 2-4 2.3.5 Oregon Aviation Plan (2000)............................................................ 2-4 2.3.6 Oregon Rail Plan (2001) .................................................................... 2-4 2.3.7 Oregon Public Transportation Plan (1997)..................................... 2-4 2.3.8 Access Management Rule (OAR 734-051)...................................... 2-4 2.3.9 Freight Moves the Oregon Economy (1999) .................................. 2-5 2.3.10 Airport Layout Plan, Newport Municipal Airport (DRAFT 2005)................................................................................... 2-5 2.3.11 Proposed Oregon Coast Highway Corridor Master Plan (1995) ................................................................................................. 2-5 2.3.12 Pacific Coast Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan for US 101 in Oregon (1997) ................................................................. 2-5 2.3.13 US 20/OR 34 Newport to Sweet Home Interim Corridor Strategy (1998).................................................................................. 2-6 2.3.14 Portland to Lincoln City Corridor: Interim Corridor Strategy, Oregon Highways 99W and 18, I-5 to US 101 (1997).................. 2-6 2.4 Lincoln County Jurisdictions ......................................................................... 2-6 2.5 Lincoln County Ports ...................................................................................... 2-7 2.6 Lincoln County ................................................................................................ 2-7 2.6.1 Lincoln County Code ........................................................................ 2-7 2.6.2 Lincoln County Bicycle Plan (1992)............................................... 2-10 2.6.3 Lincoln County Transportation System Plan (Draft, 1999)........ 2-10 3 Existing Conditions and Needs ................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Needs ................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Interface Between County and City Roads..................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Average Annual Daily Traffic Volumes .......................................... 3-4 3.1.3 Study Intersections and Raw Traffic Counts................................... 3-5 3.1.4 Operational Analysis of Existing Conditions.................................. 3-7 3.1.5 Safety Analysis .................................................................................... 3-9 3.1.6 State and Local Transportation Scheduled Improvements......... 3-31 3.1.7 Bridge Conditions and Needs ......................................................... 3-35 3.1.8 Pavement Conditions and Needs ................................................... 3-35 3.2 Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Conditions and Needs.........
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Physical and Chemical Characteristics of the Yaquina Estuary, Oregon
    PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE YAQUINA ESTUARY, OREGON Richard J. Callaway MarPoiSol P.O. Box 57 Corvallis, OR 97339 David T. Specht, Project Officer Coastal Ecology Branch U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2111 S.E. Marine Science Drive Newport, Oregon 97365-5260 2 (Purchase Order #8B06~NTT A) Submitted August 9, 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 Area of Study .................................................................................................................. 1 Estuary Classification.............................................. .......................................... 1 Local Communities ............................................................................................... 7 Physical Setting .................................................................................................... 7 Climate ................................................................................................................. ? Winds ................................................................................................................... 8 Tides .................................................................................................................... 8 Currents .............................................................................................................. 9 Estuarine Dynamics and the Hansen-Rattray Classification Scheme ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • State of the System 2016 Report on Oregon's Transportation System
    STATE OF THE SYSTEM 2016 REPORT ON OREGON’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PHOTO CREDITS All photos: ODOT Photo and Video Services or ODOT staff. TABLE OF CONTENTS A INTRODUCTION 2 Transportation System Infrastructure Map 3 An Overview of Oregon’s Transportation System and Why it’s Important for Oregon 3 Purpose of the State of the System Report 3 The Oregon Department of Transportation and its Role in the System 4 Trends Affecting Oregon and its Transportation System 5 The Oregon Transportation Plan and its Implementation 7 The Seven Oregon Transportation Plan Goals B THE STATE OF THE SYSTEM 8 Mobility and Accessibility 14 Management of the System 20 Economic Vitality 28 Sustainability 32 Safety and Security 38 Funding the Transportation System 42 Coordination, Communication and Cooperation C MOVING FORWARD 48 Where to Find Additional Information PAGE 2 STATE OF OREGON State of Oregon TRANSPORTATIONTransportation System SYSTEM Infrastructure INFRASTRUCTURE ? September 2016 Port of Astoria p Port of St. Helens Port of Morrow Port of Umatilla ? Port of Hood River ? Port of Cascade Locks Port of Arlington ? Port of Nehalem ? Port of The Dalles Eastern Oregon THE NUMBERS Port of Portland Regional at Pendleton Portland International ? ? ¨¦§84 ? o ? o ? 73,933 total miles of Port of Garibaldi ? ? highways, streets and Port of Tillamooik Bay roads 8,032 miles of state highways 32,907 miles of county roads ? 11,029 miles of city streets Port of Newport ? Port of Toledo ? 21,965 miles of “other roads” miles of "other
    [Show full text]
  • Grain, Flour and Ships – the Wheat Trade in Portland, Oregon
    Grain, Flour and Ships The Wheat Trade in Portland, Oregon Postcard Views of the Oregon Grain Industry, c1900 Prepared for Prosper Portland In Partial Fulfillment of the Centennial Mills Removal Project Under Agreement with the Oregon SHPO and the USACE George Kramer, M.S., HP Sr. Historic Preservation Specialist Heritage Research Associates, Inc. Eugene, Oregon April 2019 GRAIN, FLOUR AND SHIPS: THE WHEAT TRADE IN PORTLAND, OREGON By George Kramer Prepared for Prosper Portland 222 NW Fifth Avenue Portland, OR 97209 Heritage Research Associates, Inc. 1997 Garden Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97403 April 2019 HERITAGE RESEARCH ASSOCIATES REPORT NO. 448 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... v 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2. Historic Overview – Grain and Flour in Portland .............................................................. 4 Growing and Harvesting 4 Transporting Grain to Portland ................................................................................... 6 Exporting from Portland ............................................................................................. 8 Flour Mills .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Ridership Per Capita
    Transit Rides Average number of transit rides each year per Oregonian Our strategy Oregon’s transportation system supports the increased ridership throughout Oregon. This • Expand services to better serve state’s quality of life and economy across a Key Performance Measure will assist ODOT low-income Oregonians and students in diversity of geographies and people. Public in assessing the impact of the new funds. grades 9 – 12. transportation is a key piece of the transportation system for those who cannot With more money, transit providers will: About the target or choose not to drive. The demand for • Increase service levels in both urban and The target is an annual goal of 32 rides per public transportation in Oregon is rural areas Oregonian. The goal will need to be re- anticipated to increase as population grows. • Offer more intercity and regional route evaluated in two to four years. The target service was set by evaluating transit ridership trends Starting in 2019, an influx of funds from the • Improve transit supports such as and population growth over the five-year Statewide Transportation Improvement improved passenger facilities, and period of 2011 to 2016. Fund (STIF), created as part of the 2017 technologies such as electronic fare and transportation funding package, Keep other integrated fare systems. Oregon Moving, will fund new and expanded • Procure low- and no-emission vehicles. public transportation service, resulting in Facts • 18.9% of households report having a person who regularly uses transit (at least once a week) • 5.0% of workers report normally using transit to get to work * • 4.6% of students report normally using transit to get to school & to work September 2019 Transit Rides, cont.
    [Show full text]
  • ALL COSTS CONSIDERED III — LERC Report on Contracting
    All Costs Considered III: Further Analysis on the Contracting Out of School Support Services in Oregon Gordon Lafer, PhD Bob Bussel, PhD Jaxon Love, MBA Labor Education and Research Center University of Oregon February 2013 Acknowledgement The authors wish to thank the Oregon School Employees Association for providing financial assistance for this report. Table of Contents Introduction . 7 “A Big Impact on Longtime Employees” . 9 Assessing Privatization in Central Point . 17 Conclusion . 55 Appendix: Sources . 57 Introduction to “All Costs Considered III: Further Analysis on the Contracting Out of School Support Services in Oregon” ll Costs Considered III” marks employees working under private an extension of two previous contractors. studies conducted by the Labor “A Education and Research Center Since our previous research in (LERC) that examined the 2004 and 2008, several important transfer of school support services developments have occurred (transportation, custodial, food that have influenced the focus of service) to private operation in the this new study. During its 2009 state of Oregon. In our ongoing session, the Oregon Legislature analysis of contracting out (also passed a law (ORS 279B) known as “privatization”), we requiring that public agencies have been guided by a similar conduct a rigorous cost-benefit set of questions. Does the analysis before they decide to shift from public to private contract out a given service. The management actually deliver law stipulates that budgetary promised or predicted savings savings resulting from this to school districts? What is the administrative transfer cannot This study is an personal impact of contracting come solely from reduced wages extension of two out on workers who provide and benefits for workers employed previous studies school support services, and by a public entity.
    [Show full text]
  • Drainage Basin Morphology in the Central Coast Range of Oregon
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF WENDY ADAMS NIEM for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in GEOGRAPHY presented on July 21, 1976 Title: DRAINAGE BASIN MORPHOLOGY IN THE CENTRAL COAST RANGE OF OREGON Abstract approved: Redacted for privacy Dr. James F. Lahey / The four major streams of the central Coast Range of Oregon are: the westward-flowing Siletz and Yaquina Rivers and the eastward-flowing Luckiamute and Marys Rivers. These fifth- and sixth-order streams conform to the laws of drain- age composition of R. E. Horton. The drainage densities and texture ratios calculated for these streams indicate coarse to medium texture compa- rable to basins in the Carboniferous sandstones of the Appalachian Plateau in Pennsylvania. Little variation in the values of these parameters occurs between basins on igneous rook and basins on sedimentary rock. The length of overland flow ranges from approximately i mile to i mile. Two thousand eight hundred twenty-five to 6,140 square feet are necessary to support one foot of channel in the central Coast Range. Maximum elevation in the area is 4,097 feet at Marys Peak which is the highest point in the Oregon Coast Range. The average elevation of summits in the thesis area is ap- proximately 1500 feet. The calculated relief ratios for the Siletz, Yaquina, Marys, and Luckiamute Rivers are compara- ble to relief ratios of streams on the Gulf and Atlantic coastal plains and on the Appalachian Piedmont. Coast Range streams respond quickly to increased rain- fall, and runoff is rapid. The Siletz has the largest an- nual discharge and the highest sustained discharge during the dry summer months.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser Medirostris) AS an ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER the ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
    PETITION TO LIST THE NORTH AMERICAN GREEN STURGEON (Acipenser medirostris) AS AN ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION INFORMATION CENTER CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY WATERKEEPERS NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PETITIONERS JUNE 2001 NOTICE OF PETITION Environmental Protection Information Center P.O. Box 397 Garberville, CA 95542 (707) 923-2931 Contact: Cynthia Elkins Center for Biological Diversity P.O. Box 40090 Berkeley, CA 94704 (510) 841-0812 Contact: Jeff Miller WaterKeepers Northern California Presidio Building 1004 San Francisco, CA 94129 (415) 561.2299 ext. 14 Contact: Jonathan Kaplan Petitioners Environmental Protection Information Center (“EPIC”), Center for Biological Diversity (“CBD”), and WaterKeepers Northern California (“WaterKeepers”) formally request that the National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) list the North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) as an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544. In the alternative, petitioners formally request that NMFS list the North American green sturgeon as a threatened species under the ESA. In either case, petitioners request that green sturgeon critical habitat be designated concurrent with the listing designation. This petition is filed under §553(e) of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA” - 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-559), §1533(b)(3) of the ESA, and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b). This petition sets in motion a specific administrative process as defined by §1533(b)(3) and 50 C.F.R. §424.14(b), placing mandatory response requirements on NMFS. Because A. medirostris is an anadromous fish, NMFS has jurisdiction over this petition. A Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between NMFS and the U.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Resource Guide
    PORTLAND TRANSPORTATION RESOURCE GUIDE A guide for getting around Portland ST_Transportation_Resource_Guide_2018_0223.indd 1 2/23/18 3:57 PM Table of Contents Walking 1 MAPS AND INFORMATION COMMUNITY WALKS AND HIKES Bicycling 3 MAPS AND INFORMATION COMMUNITY RIDES AND CLINICS BICYCLE RENTALS BICYCLE RIDES AND CLINICS AT A GLANCE Transit 8 Mobility Devices and Accessibility 8 Motorcycles and Motor Scooters 10 Skates and Skateboards 10 Taxis and Pedicabs 10 Sharing 10 BIKE SHARING RIDE SHARING CAR SHARING Getting Out of Portland ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11 General Transportation Resources ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 13 Important City of Portland Numbers ���������������������������������������������������Back Cover Women-specific rides and clinics offered TABLE OF CONTENTS ST_Transportation_Resource_Guide_2018_0223.indd 2 2/23/18 3:57 PM Walking — Maps and Information City of Portland Active Transportation and Safety Division Walking maps, summer guided walks, safety information, resources, policies and more. portlandoregongov/transportation/at
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRESS REPORTS 2005 FISH DIVISION Oregon
    PROGRESS REPORTS 2005 FISH DIVISION Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Final Summary Report: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics in Oregon This program receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and/or Wildlife Restoration and prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex or disability. If you believe that you have been discriminated against as described above in any program, activity, or facility, or if you desire further information, please contact ADA Coordinator, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, 3406 Cherry Avenue NE, Salem, OR, 97303, 503-947-6000, or write Office for Human Resources, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. This material will be furnished in alternate format for people with disabilities if needed. Please call (503) 657-2000 ext. 406 to request. FINAL PROGRESS REPORT FISH RESEARCH PROJECT OREGON PROJECT TITLE: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics In Oregon PROJECT NUMBER: F-178-R JOB NUMBER: 1 JOB TITLE: Green Sturgeon Population Characteristics In Oregon PROJECT PERIOD: 1 October 1999 – 30 September 2004 Prepared by: Ruth A. Farr J. Chris Kern Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 17330 Southeast Evelyn Street Clackamas, OR 97015 This project was financed in part with the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (Wallop- Breaux) funds through the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. CONTENTS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • The Yaquina Estuary and Its Inhabitants a Trail Guide
    The Yaquina Estuary &Its Inhabitants HATFIELD MARINE SCIENCE CENTER n the end, we will conserve “ only what we love, we will love only what we under- stand, and we will understand only what we are taught. —Baba Dioum, Senegalese philosopher” Published by Oregon Sea Grant, Oregon State University, 1600 SW Western Blvd., Suite 350, Corvallis, OR 97333. Phone: 541-737-2714. Web: seagrant.oregonstate.edu Facebook: www.facebook.com/OregonSeaGrant Twitter: twitter.com/OregonSeaGrant © 1999 by Oregon State University. Revised 2019. All rights reserved. All illustrations copyrighted 1999 by Barbara Gleason. This report was prepared by Oregon Sea Grant under award number NA18OAR4170072 (project number M/A-21) from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce, and by appropria- tions made by the Oregon State Legislature. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these funders. ORESU-H-19-001 The Yaquina Estuary and Its Inhabitants A Trail Guide he Hatfield Marine Science Center (HMSC) invites you to take a one-mile walk along our nature trail. This Ttrail follows the bay side of the Marine Science Center along the Yaquina Estuary and ends near the Oregon Coast Aquarium. The trailhead is located in the northeast corner of the HMSC public parking lot. Marine Science Center Campus THE YAQUINA ESTUARY AND ITS INHABITANTS -~1 What is an estuary? A place where freshwater and saltwater meet Here in Yaquina Bay, high tide brings saltwater from the ocean to mix with freshwa- ter flowing down the Yaquina River.
    [Show full text]
  • State Waterway Navigability Determination
    BODY OF WATER & LOCATION NAV CG NON-NAV CG REMARKS yellow highlight = apply to USCG for permit up to RM stipulated Alsea Bay, OR X Estuary of Pacific Ocean. Alsea River, OR X Flows into Alsea Bay, Waldport, OR. Navigable to mile 13. Ash Creek, OR X Tributary of Willamette River at Independence, OR. Barrett Slough, OR X Tributary of Lewis and Clark River. Bayou St. John, OR X Court decision, 1935 AMC 594, 10 Mile Lake, Coos County, OR. Bear Creek (Coos County), OR X Tributary of Coquille River (tidal at mile 0.5) Beaver Creek, OR X Tributary of Nestucca River. Beaver Slough, OR X See Clatskanie River. Big Creek (Lane County), OR X At U.S. 101 bridge (tidal). Big Creek (Lincoln County), OR X Flows into Pacific Ocean. Big Creek Slough, OR X Upstream end at Knappa, OR (tidal). At site of Birch Creek (Sparks) Bridge on Canyon Road near Birch Creek, OR X Pendleton, OR. Side channel of Yaquina River. 3 mi. downstream from Toledo, Blind Slough, OR X OR (tidal). Tributary of Knappa Slough. 10 mi. upstream from Astoria, OR Blind Slough/ Gnat Creek, OR X (tidal at mile 2.0). Boone Slough, OR X Tributary of Yaquina River between Newport and Toledo, OR. Side channel of Willamette River. 3 miles upstream from Booneville Channel, OR X Corvallis, OR. Boulder Creek, OR X 7 miles N of Lake Quinalt. Side channel of Columbia River. 5 miles N of Clatskanie, OR Bradbury Slough, OR X (tidal). Brownlee Reservoir, ID /OR X See Snake River. Also known as South Channel.
    [Show full text]
  • Wasco County Public Transportation Advisory Committee
    Wasco County Public Transportation Advisory Committee The Dalles Transit Center, 802 Chenowith Loop Road, The Dalles Via Remote Access (Access information attached to agenda) Thursday, December 3, 2020 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. TOPIC TIME ITEM Introductions Minutes 5 minutes Approval Review and Recommend Approval of Wasco 15 Minutes Approval County Coordinated Human Services Public Transportation Plan to BOCC Review STIF Formula 45 Minutes Review • Oregon Public Transportation Goals • Project list (DRAFT) • Selection Criteria • Defining High Percentage of Low-Income Adjourn The meeting location is accessible to persons with disabilities. If you have a disability that requires any special materials, services or assistance, please contact MCEDD at 541-296- 2266 (TTY 711) at least 48 hours before the meeting. MCEDD is an equal opportunity lender, employer and provider. WASCO COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2020 ZOOM TELECONFERENCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Jim Holycross, Louise Sargent, Charlotte Sallee, Kris Boler, Lee Bryant STAFF: Brad Houghton (Deputy Director), Kathy Fitzpatrick (Mobility Manager), Lauren Hernandez (Office Administrator) GUESTS: Theresa Conley (ODOT), Krista Purser (Kittelson & Associates) CALL TO ORDER/INTRODUCTIONS Brad Houghton called the meeting to order at 10:07 a.m. A quorum was present. A roundtable of introductions took place. MINUTES Louise Sargent motioned to approve the minutes of August 2020 as presented. Kris Boler seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. KITTELSON CONSULTANTS Krista Purser reviewed steps for the Transportation Development Plan. She noted Angelo Planning Group will be consulted on land use items. Krista explained project goals include considering fixed-route, demand-response, and intercommunity services; considering capital investments and infrastructure; and providing a coordinated vision for transit service.
    [Show full text]