DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix A: Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix A: Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis Volume 2 {00 Appendix A: Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis {00 B FINAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #1 Eugene Transportation System Plan: Existing Conditions and Deficiencies PREPARED FOR: Eugene TSP Project Management Team PREPARED BY: Mariah VanZerr, CH2M HILL Jessica Roberts, Alta Planning + Design Dana Dickman, Alta Planning + Design Joe Bessman, Kittelson and Associates Serah Breakstone, Angelo Planning Group CC: Theresa Carr, CH2M HILL Julia Kuhn, Kittelson & Associates Matt Hastie, Angelo Planning Group DATE: March 4, 2011 This memorandum describes and analyzes the current (2010) transportation system in Eugene, including existing conditions and deficiencies. The report evaluates the roadway network, public transportation routes and service, bicycle facilities, pedestrian facilities, rail facilities, airports, and pipelines within the project study area. This memorandum also describes general land use patterns and major activity centers that generate traffic. The information used to describe the existing system and identify deficiencies in this report came from the City of Eugene, Lane County, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Lane Transit District (LTD) and from the consultant team through a site visit on July 27-28, 2010. While this document attempts to accurately reflect the existing conditions of the transportation system within Eugene, it is not meant to serve as an all-encompassing and comprehensive final assessment. Rather, the document is meant to serve as a starting point for discussion by the broader community, and will be used to help inform the development of the Eugene TSP (TSP). The memorandum is organized as follows: Contents Study Area ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Land Use Analysis ............................................................................................................ 4 Demographic Analysis .................................................................................................. 13 Policy Context .............................................................................................................................. 15 Statewide Plans, Policies and Relevant Documents .................................................. 16 Regional Plans, Polices and Relevant Documents ..................................................... 32 Local Plans, Policies and Relevant Documents .......................................................... 36 Roadway Network and Conditions .......................................................................................... 41 Functional Classification ............................................................................................... 41 EUGENETSP_FINALEXISTINGCONDITIONSREPORT.DOC 1 EUGENE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DEFICIENCIES State Roadways ............................................................................................................... 42 Lane County Roadways ................................................................................................ 43 City of Eugene Roadways ............................................................................................. 44 Freight Routes ................................................................................................................. 53 Traffic Operational Analysis ...................................................................................................... 55 Design Hour Traffic Volumes ....................................................................................... 55 Intersection Operating Standards ................................................................................ 56 Intersection Operations Analyses ................................................................................ 57 Recurrent Congestion Sites ........................................................................................... 64 Safety Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 65 Intersection Crash Rates ................................................................................................ 66 Beltline Highway Safety Review .................................................................................. 75 Fatalities ......................................................................................................................... 76 Corridor Safety Needs ................................................................................................... 76 Pedestrian System ....................................................................................................................... 76 Pedestrian Facility Types ............................................................................................... 76 Existing Pedestrian Facilities and Conditions ............................................................ 77 Bicycle System .............................................................................................................................. 81 Bicycle Facility Types ..................................................................................................... 81 Existing Bicycle Facilities and Conditions .................................................................. 82 Transit Service and Facilities...................................................................................................... 86 Transit Service ................................................................................................................. 86 Rail System ................................................................................................................................... 94 Freight Rail ...................................................................................................................... 94 Intercity Passenger Rail ................................................................................................. 96 Eugene Airport ............................................................................................................................ 98 Facilities ......................................................................................................................... 98 Service and Usage ........................................................................................................... 99 Ground Transportation Options ................................................................................ 100 Waterways and Pipeline Facilities .......................................................................................... 101 Waterways ..................................................................................................................... 101 Pipelines ....................................................................................................................... 101 Summary of Deficiencies .......................................................................................................... 101 Traffic Operations and Safety Deficiencies ............................................................... 101 Pedestrian System Deficiencies .................................................................................. 103 Bicycle System Deficiencies ......................................................................................... 104 Transit Deficiencies ...................................................................................................... 106 Freight System Deficiencies ....................................................................................... 107 Rail System Deficiencies .............................................................................................. 107 Airport Deficiencies ..................................................................................................... 109 Next Steps ................................................................................................................................... 111 List of Figures Figure 1: Study Area Figure 2: MetroPlan Land Use Designations Figure 3: Base-Zoning EUGENETSP_FINALEXISTINGCONDITIONSREPORT.DOC 2 EUGENE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN: EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DEFICIENCIES Figure 4a: Activity Areas and Mixed Use Development Areas/Central Eugene Figure 4b: Activity Areas and Mixed Use Development Areas/South Hills Figure 4c: Activity Areas and Mixed Use Development Areas/W Eugene/Bethel/ Danebo Figure 4d: Activity Areas and Mixed Use Development Areas/Northeast Eugene Figure 4e: Activity Areas and Mixed Use Development Areas/River Road/Santa Clara Figure 5: Roadway Functional Classification Figure 6: Freight Routes and Rail Facilities Figure 7: Study Intersections Figure 8: Intersection Performance Figure 9: Streets with Capacity Constraints Today and in the Future Figure 10: Intersection Safety Figure 11: Pedestrian Facilities Figure 12: Bicycle Facilities Figure 13: Transit Routes and Facilities Figure 14: EmX Routes Figure 15: Eugene Airport and Vicinity Figure 16: Waterway and Pipeline System List of Tables Table 1: Select 2008 American Community Survey Demographic Characteristics Table 2: 2008 American Community Survey Commute Mode Split Table 3: Intersection Performance Summary for 30th Highest Hour Conditions Table
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Document.Pdf
    SAFEWAY // MCMINNVILLE, OR CORPORATE 20-YEAR ABSOLUTE NET LEASE Offering Memorandum EXCLUSIVELY LISTED BY JOSEPH BLATNER // Senior Vice President 503.200.2029 // [email protected] NON-ENDORSEMENT & DISCLAIMER NOTICE CONFIDENTIALITY & DISCLAIMER The information contained in the following Marketing Brochure is proprietary and strictly confidential. It is intended to be reviewed only by the party receiving it from Marcus & Millichap and should not be made available to any other person or entity without the written consent of Marcus & Millichap. This Marketing Brochure has been prepared to provide summary, unverified information to prospective purchasers, and to establish only a preliminary level of interest in the subject property. The information contained herein is not a substitute for a thorough due diligence investigation. Marcus & Millichap has not made any investigation, and makes no warranty or representation, with respect to the income or expenses for the subject property, the future projected financial performance of the property, the size and square footage of the property and improvements, the presence or absence of contaminating substances, PCB’s or asbestos, the compliance with State and Federal regulations, the physical condition of the improvements thereon, or the financial condition or business prospects of any tenant, or any tenant’s plans or intentions to continue its occupancy of the subject property. The information contained in this Marketing Brochure has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable; however, Marcus & Millichap has not verified, and will not verify, any of the information contained herein, nor has Marcus & Millichap conducted any investigation regarding these matters and makes no warranty or representation whatsoever regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Iamp) Project Management
    L AND USE PLANNING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROJECT MANAGEMENT MEMORANDUM LAND USE PLANNING Technical Memorandum #1: Plans and Policies ReviewTRANSPORTATION (Task 3.3)PLANNING Exit 30 Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) PROJECT MANAGEMENT DATE December 18, 2019 LAND USE PLANNING TO Matt Hughart and Matt Bell, Kittelson & Associates TRANSPORTATION PLANNING FROM Darci Rudzinski, Clinton “CJ” Doxsee, and Courtney Simms, Angelo PlanningPROJECT Group MANAGEMENT CC Project Management Team LAND USE PLANNING TRANSPORTATION PLANNING OVERVIEW PROJECT MANAGEMENT Pursuant to the scope of work (Task 3.3), this memorandum presents a reviewL of A N existing D US E PLANNINGplans, regulations, agreements, and policies that affect transportation planningTRANSPORTATION in the study area PLANNING for the City of Medford and ODOT I-5 Exit 30 Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP)PROJECT. The MANAGEMENT review explains the relationship between the documents and planning in this area, identifying key issues to track through the IAMP development process. LAND USE PLANNING Documents in this review establish transportation-related standards, targets,TRANSPORTATION and guidelines PLANNING as well as transportation improvements with which the IAMP shall coordinate and be consistent. Other PROJECT MANAGEMENT documents in this review – such as the City of Medford Transportation System Plan (TSP) and Land Development Code (LDC) – may be subject to future recommended amendments in order to implement the IAMP. Once the IAMP and implementing ordinances are completed,LAND itUSE is expected PLANNING that the City will adopt key elements of the IAMP as a refinement to theTRANSPORTATION Medford TSP before PLANNING the IAMP is considered by the Oregon Transportation Commission (OTC) for adoption.PROJECT Upon MANAGEMENT adoption by the OTC, the IAMP becomes an amendment to the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP).
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Format
    Attachment 3 Jurisdictional Transfer Agreement No. 828 JURISDICTIONAL TRANSFER AGREEMENT Territorial Highway (Mile Point 2.03 to Mile Point 42.08) Section Oregon Route 200 (OR 200) County of Lane THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "State,” or “ODOT;" and LANE COUNTY, acting by and through its elected officials, hereinafter referred to as "County," both herein referred to individually or collectively as “Party” or “Parties.” RECITALS 1. Territorial Highway is under the jurisdiction and control of the Oregon Transportation Commission (hereinafter “OTC”). Territorial Highway, State Highway number 200 is also designated as State Route OR 200. State Bridge number 04037 is located at mile point 4.59, State Bridge number 04042 is located at mile point 7.07, State Bridge number 04049 is located at mile point 17.92, State Bridge number 04050A is located at mile point 18.72, State Bridge number 01699A is located at mile point 18.98, State Bridge number 01700A is located at mile point 19.28, State Bridge number 07271 is located at mile point 25.49, and State Bridge number 04059 is located at mile point 37.93 on Territorial Highway. 2. By the authority granted in Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 190.110, 366.572 and 366.576, State may enter into cooperative agreements with counties, cities and units of local governments for the performance of work on certain types of improvement projects with the allocation of costs on terms and conditions mutually agreeable to the contracting Parties.
    [Show full text]
  • Mitigation Measures That BPA and Its Contractors Are Committed to Implementing
    Alvey-Fairview Transmission Line Rebuild Project Finding of No Significant Impact Bonneville Power Administration DOE/EA-1891 May 2014 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Summary Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) announces its environmental findings for the Alvey-Fairview Transmission Line Rebuild Project. The project involves rebuilding the existing 230-kilovolt (kV) transmission line that runs from Eugene to Coquille, Oregon. The aging, 97.5-mile-long line requires replacement of its wood-pole structures and other line components and needs improvements to its access road system. BPA has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) evaluating the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. Based on the analysis in the EA, BPA has determined that the Proposed Action is not a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 United States Code [USC] 4321 et seq.). Therefore, the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required and BPA is issuing this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action is not the type of action that normally requires preparation of an EIS and is not without precedent. The comments received on the Draft EA and responses to the comments are included in the Final EA. The Final EA also identifies changes made to the Draft EA. Attached is a Mitigation Action Plan that lists all the mitigation measures that BPA and its contractors are committed to implementing. The FONSI also includes a statement of findings on how the Proposed Action impacts wetlands and floodplains.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 OREGON ACTION PLAN for Implementation of Department Of
    2020 OREGON ACTION PLAN For Implementation of Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3362: “Improving Habitat Quality in Western Big-Game Winter Range and Migration Corridors” Introduction Secretarial Order 3362 (SO3362) directs appropriate bureaus (US Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS], National Park Service [NPS], and Bureau of Land Management [BLM]) within the Department of the Interior (DOI) to work in close partnership with the State of Oregon to enhance and improve the quality of big-game winter range and migration corridor habitat on Federal lands under the management jurisdiction of the DOI in a way that recognizes state authority to conserve and manage big-game species and respects private property rights. Through scientific endeavors and land management actions, wildlife such as Rocky Mountain Elk (elk), Mule Deer (deer), Pronghorn Antelope (pronghorn), and a host of other species will benefit. Conditions in the broader landscape influence the function of migration corridors and sustainability of big game populations. Such conditions may include habitat fragmentation, land use patterns, resource management, or urbanization. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), through the USDA Forest Service (USFS) and USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), will collaborate with DOI, the states, and other natural resource managers across the broader landscape when developing an all-lands approach to research, planning, and management for ecological resources, to include migration corridors in a manner that promotes the welfare and populations of elk, deer, and pronghorn, as well as the ecological integrity of terrestrial ecosystems in Oregon. There are just over 62 million acres of land in Oregon, of which approximately 51% (31.9 million acres) is either DOI or Forest Service (USFS) managed.
    [Show full text]
  • CITY COUNCIL December 10, 2013 Council Chambers • 777 SW Deschutes Avenue
    CITY HALL 716 SW EVERGREEN AVE REDMOND, OR 97756 541.923.7710 FAX: 541.548.0706 www.ci.redmond.or.us CITY COUNCIL December 10, 2013 Council Chambers • 777 SW Deschutes Avenue COUNCIL MEMBERS DECEMBER 10, 2013 REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 7:00 P.M. George Endicott I. CALL TO ORDER / ESTABLISH A QUORUM Mayor II. INVOCATION Tory Allman A. Pastor Michael Dismore, Central Oregon Police Chaplaincy Councilor III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Joe Centanni Councilor IV. COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS AT THE MEETING Camden King V. MAJOR REDMOND STREET CONSTRUCTION UPDATE Councilor VI. CONSENT AGENDA Ginny McPherson A. Minutes of November 12, 2013, P.M. Council Meeting Exhibit 1 Councilor B. Minutes of November 25, 2013, Special P.M. Council Workshop Exhibit 2 C. Minutes of November 26, 2013, Special P.M. Council Workshop Exhibit 3 Ed Onimus D. Minutes of November 26, 2013, P.M. Council Meeting Exhibit 4 Councilor E. Air Service Agreement with American Airlines Exhibit 5 F. Re-Approval of City Investment Policy, FIN 111 - Investments Exhibit 6 G. Change Order with Povey and Associates Land Surveyors for Exhibit 7 Jay Patrick Councilor the Homestead Canal Trail Survey Project H. Healthcare Preparedness Program Grant Award Exhibit 8 VII. ACTION ITEMS A. 27th Street Roundabout Public Art Project Proposal Exhibit 9 VIII. PRESENTATIONS A. Economic Development for Central Oregon, Roger Lee IX. BID AWARD / BID REJECTION A. SW Timber Avenue 18” Transmission Main Exhibit 10 X. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ord. #2013-15 – An ordinance amending the City of Redmond Exhibit 11 Urban Area Comprehensive Plan, to adopt the Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis as a reference document, with associated Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies added to Chapter 9, Economic Development and Chapter 14, Urbanization.
    [Show full text]
  • Milebymile.Com Personal Road Trip Guide Oregon State Highway #62
    MileByMile.com Personal Road Trip Guide Oregon State Highway #62 Miles ITEM SUMMARY 0.0 Medford, OR - Junction of Community of Medford, Oregon. Attractions: Alba Park, Bear Creek Oregon Route #238 & Park, Claire Hanley Arboretum, Medford Carnegie Library, and Roxy Interstate 5 Ann Peak and Prescott Park. a Altitude: 1322 feet 0.4 Bullock Road: Airport Bullock Road, Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport, a public airport located in Medford, Oregon in Jackson County, Oregon, It is the third busiest airport in Oregon. Altitude: 1322 feet 0.9 Skypark Drive skypark Drive, Sky Park, Providence Medford Medical Centet, lies along the Interstate Highway #5, Altitude: 1339 feet 5.5 Junction Junction Lake of the Woods Highway/Oregon Route #140, Hoover Ponds County Park, Southern Oregon Speedway, a 3/8 mile banked dirt race track located along Oregon Route #140, near White City, Oregon, It is part of the Jackson County Sports Park, Agate Reservoir, Agate Lake County Park, Altitude: 1309 feet 6.6 Ave G: White City, OR Ave G, White City, a community in Jackson County, Oregon, Camp White, an Army training base and a site of a Prioner-of-war (POW) Camp, during World War II, in Jackson County, Oregon. Ken Denman Wildlife Area State of Oregon, The Denman Wildlife Area, TouVelle State Recreation Site, Touvelle State Park, Altitude: 1332 feet 8.9 Nick Young Road: Eagle Nick Young Road, Eagle Point, Oregon, a city in Jackson County, Point, OR Oregon, located east of Oregon Route #62, Rogue River flows on the west side of the Oregon Highway #62.
    [Show full text]
  • Conde Mccullough
    Conde McCullough Conde Balcom McCullough (May 30, 1887 – May 5, 1946) Conde McCullough was a U.S. bridge engineer who is primarily known for designing many of Oregon's coastal bridges on U.S. Route 101.[1] The native of South Dakota worked for the Oregon Department of Transportation from 1919 to 1935 and 1937 until 1946. McCullough also was a professor at Oregon State University. Early life Conde McCullough was born in Redfield, South Dakota, on May 30, 1887.[2] In 1891, he and his family moved to Iowa where his father died in 1904.[2] McCullough then worked at various jobs to May 30, 1887 [2] Born support the family. In 1910, he graduated from Iowa State Redfield, South Dakota, U.S. [3] May 5, 1946 (aged 58) University with a civil engineering degree. Died Oregon Career Nationality American Isaac Lee Patterson Bridge Buildings Yaquina Bay Bridge McCullough began working for the Marsh Bridge Company in Des Alsea Bay Bridge Moines, Iowa, where he remained for one year.[2] He then went to work for the Iowa State Highway Commission.[2] Conde moved to Oregon in 1916 and became an assistant professor of civil engineering at Oregon Agricultural College, and the sole structural engineering professor at the school.[2] In 1919 he became the head of the Bridge Division of the Oregon Department of Transportation, making him personally responsible for the design of Oregon's bridges at a time when the state was completing Highway 101. His designs are well known for their architectural beauty.[4] McCullough advocated that bridges be built economically, efficiently, and with beauty.[1] He helped design over 600 bridges, many with architectural details such as Gothic spires, art deco obelisks, and Romanesque arches incorporated into the bridges.[5] In 1928, he graduated from Willamette University College of Law and passed the bar the same year.[6] In 1935 he moved to San José, Costa Rica to help design bridges on the Pan-American Highway.
    [Show full text]
  • FONSI and Mitigation Action Plan
    Alvey-Fairview Transmission Line Rebuild Project Finding of No Significant Impact Bonneville Power Administration DOE/EA-1891 May 2014 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Summary Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) announces its environmental findings for the Alvey-Fairview Transmission Line Rebuild Project. The project involves rebuilding the existing 230-kilovolt (kV) transmission line that runs from Eugene to Coquille, Oregon. The aging, 97.5-mile-long line requires replacement of its wood-pole structures and other line components and needs improvements to its access road system. BPA has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) evaluating the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. Based on the analysis in the EA, BPA has determined that the Proposed Action is not a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 United States Code [USC] 4321 et seq.). Therefore, the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required and BPA is issuing this Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action is not the type of action that normally requires preparation of an EIS and is not without precedent. The comments received on the Draft EA and responses to the comments are included in the Final EA. The Final EA also identifies changes made to the Draft EA. Attached is a Mitigation Action Plan that lists all the mitigation measures that BPA and its contractors are committed to implementing. The FONSI also includes a statement of findings on how the Proposed Action impacts wetlands and floodplains.
    [Show full text]
  • Conde Mccullough
    Conde McCullough Conde Balcom McCullough (May 30, 1887 – May 5, 1946) Conde McCullough was a U.S. bridge engineer who is primarily known for designing many of Oregon's coastal bridges on U.S. Route 101.[1] The native of South Dakota worked for the Oregon Department of Transportation from 1919 to 1935 and 1937 until 1946. McCullough also was a professor at Oregon State University. Early life Conde McCullough was born in Redfield, South Dakota, on May 30, 1887.[2] In 1891, he and his family moved to Iowa where his father died in 1904.[2] McCullough then worked at various jobs to May 30, 1887 [2] Born support the family. In 1910, he graduated from Iowa State Redfield, South Dakota, U.S. [3] May 5, 1946 (aged 58) University with a civil engineering degree. Died Oregon Career Nationality American Isaac Lee Patterson Bridge Buildings Yaquina Bay Bridge McCullough began working for the Marsh Bridge Company in Des Alsea Bay Bridge Moines, Iowa, where he remained for one year.[2] He then went to work for the Iowa State Highway Commission.[2] Conde moved to Oregon in 1916 and became an assistant professor of civil engineering at Oregon Agricultural College, and the sole structural engineering professor at the school.[2] In 1919 he became the head of the Bridge Division of the Oregon Department of Transportation, making him personally responsible for the design of Oregon's bridges at a time when the state was completing Highway 101. His designs are well known for their architectural beauty.[4] McCullough advocated that bridges be built economically, efficiently, and with beauty.[1] He helped design over 600 bridges, many with architectural details such as Gothic spires, art deco obelisks, and Romanesque arches incorporated into the bridges.[5] In 1928, he graduated from Willamette University College of Law and passed the bar the same year.[6] In 1935 he moved to San José, Costa Rica to help design bridges on the Pan-American Highway.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Law Enforcement Deployment Patterns on Motorists’ Speeds
    THE EFFECT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT DEPLOYMENT PATTERNS ON MOTORISTS’ SPEEDS Final Report SPR 304-161 by Kevin J. Haas, P.E. Barnie P. Jones, Ph.D. Alan R. Kirk for Oregon Department of Transportation Research Unit 200 Hawthorne Ave. SE, Suite B-240 Salem OR 97301-5192 and Federal Highway Administration 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington, DC 20590 December 2003 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-OR-DF-04-04 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date The Effect of Law Enforcement Deployment Patterns on Motorists’ December 2003 Speeds 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Kevin J. Haas, P.E., Barnie P. Jones, Ph.D. and Alan R. Kirk 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Oregon Department of Transportation Research Unit 11. Contract or Grant No. 200 Hawthorne Ave. SE, Suite B-240 Salem, Oregon 97301-5192 SPR 304 - 161 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Oregon Department of Transportation Final Report Research Unit and Federal Highway Administration 200 Hawthorne Ave. SE, Suite B-240 400 Seventh Street S.W. Salem, Oregon 97301-5192 Washington, DC 20590 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract The combination of increased demands on Oregon’s transportation system and limited law enforcement resources has led the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to investigate whether a relationship exists between motorists’ speeds and law enforcement levels. If an optimum level of law enforcement could be identified that reduces the number of motorists driving in an unsafe manner, the end result could be a more efficient deployment of scarce law enforcement resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Interim Corridor Strategy Highway 126 West
    Interim Corridor Strategy Highway 126 West Highway 101 in Florence to 1-5 in Eugene April 1998 Oregon Department of Transportation Region 2 2960 State Street Salem, Oregon 973 10 Interim Corridor Strategy Highway 126 West Highway 101 in Florence to 1-5 in Eugene Prepared for: Oregon Department of Transportation Salem, Oregon 973 10 (54 1) 726-2589 Prepared by: ~gogLane Council of Governments 125 East Eighth Avenue Eugene, Oregon 9740 1 (54I) 682-4283 April 1998 Table of Contents ES Executive Summary What is Corridor Planning and Why is it Being Done? Corridor Overview Major Findings and Conclusions What's Next? 1 Overview of Corridor Planning Introduction Corridor Planning Description and Purpose Planning Requirements Corridor Planning Process Corridor Planning Participants 2 Highway 126 West Corridor Overview General Corridor Description Corridor Segments Summary of Legislation, Prior Plans, and Studies Population and Employment Projections Land Development Projections Tourism and Recreational Travel 3 Existing Conditions and Facilities Introduction Highway System Railroads Air Service Public Transit and Inter-City Bus Bicycles Pedestrians and Walkways Pipelines Segment-by-Segment Summary- 4 Future Conditions Introduction Highway System Railroads Air Service Public Transit and Inter-City Bus Bicycles Pedestrians and Walkways 5 Issues, Opportunities, and Constraints Introduction Transportation Balance Regional Connectivity Highway Congestion Safety Economic Impacts Social and Land Use Impacts Environmental Impacts Energy Impacts 6 Interim
    [Show full text]