Planning Commission tackles Transportation System Plan

BAY CITY Feb. 24, 2010 --- The Bay City Planning Commission held a public hearing February 17 to give local residents and other interested parties an opportunity to comment on the proposed Transportation System Plan.

A plan is ordinarily adopted by City Council resolution. But a Transportation Plan is different, dealing, to some extent, with land use. Oregon Administrative Rules require that a Transportation System Plan be made a part of the Comprehensive Plan.

The proposed Transportation System Plan has a somewhat convoluted history. It began with an application for a Transportation Growth Management Grant to develop a Transportation System Master Plan in January 2007. In July 2007, an ODOT representative gave City Planner Sabrina Pearson some boilerplate transportation plan language derived from a Transportation Refinement Plan recently developed for Rockaway Beach.

In 2008, grantors ODOT and the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) contracted with Parametrix to develop the Plan. Parametrix was selected from a list of pre-qualified pre-approved contractors who have executed price agreements with the State.

As required under terms of the grant, the City named a Public Advisory Committee (PAC), consisting of representatives of the City Council, Planning Commission, local residents and other stakeholders. The PAC met with the Parametrix planning consultant four times to provide input on various aspects of the Transportation Refinement Plan being crafted. Not until the January 6 wrap-up meeting was it was discovered that the plan should have been a Transportation System Plan.

This is a technicality in the planning process. A Refinement Plan is developed to improve upon some aspect of a previously-developed System Plan. There are certain specific requirements for a System Plan which can be satisfied by the entire content of the plan itself, or by showing that elements absent from the plan have been addressed in City ordinances or its Comprehensive Plan.

Happily, Pearson's research established that all the System Plan requirements had been met, either in the Plan itself, or in City ordinances. Total cost of the Plan to date is $63,700. $56,693 was paid under the grant, and $7,007 by the City as its 11 percent match. The plan envisions growth in transportation needs through the year 2030.

The Plan contains several street maps, all from an aerial photo with streets enhanced. One map shows functional classifications of Bay City streets, and others are annotated to point out various features in town. Also contained in the plan are redesign diagrams for highway intersections at Warren, McCoy, Fifth/Portland, and Hayes Oyster Drive; street cross sections for each of the street functional classifications; and proposed bicycle routes.

The Commission heard testimony by Tom Imhoff, who recently retired from the City of Portland's Roads Department. Imhoff expressed concern that aspects of the Plan might impart too much of an urban quality to Bay City.

Policy in the Comprehensive Plan requires development in Bay City to be consistent with the City's rural coastal character. Imhoff intimated that Bay City might be trying to go too far too fast. Bike facilities needn't be as formalized as in the plan, he said, and full improvement of the streets, as envisioned in the Plan, are not appropriate in Bay City. Imhoff recommended allowing for gravel streets, which the Plan does not address.

Imhoff was especially concerned about traffic calming measures suggested in the plan, and urged caution when designing chicanes or bump-outs for downtown streets. These narrow the streets and make it difficult for delivery trucks to serve downtown businesses. He recommended against installing speed bumps, and asked whether the Fire Department had been consulted on the Plan.

Imhoff opposed creation of a roads district to pay for maintenance and improvement of Bay City streets, recommending instead that street improvements be funded through revenue bonds and Local Improvement Districts. Imhoff's property consists of agricultural forest land zoned Low Intensity. Such zoning, he said, would cause a severe increase in his property taxes.

Also testifying before the Commission were Ingrid Weisenbach, ODOT district manager, and Liane Welch, Bay City resident and Tillamook County Roads Department Director.

Several on the Commission expressed concern that the Plan did not accomplish a highway speed reduction to 35 mph through the downtown area of Bay City. Commissioner Terry Spath strongly supported reduction of speed to 35 mph and establishment of crosswalks where pedestrians could cross the highway safely. Bay City is the only city on the Oregon Coast which is completely bisected by U.S. 101, with no provision for pedestrian crossings. Spath said he likes to take his dog for walks along the railroad right-of-way, and takes his life in his hands getting there.


Back
Planning Commission tackles Transportation System Plan By John Sollman
BAY CITY Feb. 24, 2010 --- The Bay City Planning Commission held a public hearing February 17 to give local residents and other interested parties an opportunity to comment on the proposed Transportation System Plan. A plan is ordinarily adopted by City Council resolution. But a Transportation Plan is different, dealing, to some extent, with land use. Oregon Administrative Rules require that a Transportation System Plan be made a part of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Transportation System Plan has a somewhat convoluted history. It began with an application for a Transportation Growth Management Grant to develop a Transportation System Master Plan in January 2007. In July 2007, an ODOT representative gave City Planner Sabrina Pearson some boilerplate transportation plan language derived from a Transportation Refinement Plan recently developed for Rockaway Beach. In 2008, grantors ODOT and the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) contracted with Parametrix to develop the Plan. Parametrix was selected from a list of pre-qualified pre-approved contractors who have executed price agreements with the State. As required under terms of the grant, the City named a Public Advisory Committee (PAC), consisting of representatives of the City Council, Planning Commission, local residents and other stakeholders. The PAC met with the Parametrix planning consultant four times to provide input on various aspects of the Transportation Refinement Plan being crafted. Not until the January 6 wrap-up meeting was it was discovered that the plan should have been a Transportation System Plan. This is a technicality in the planning process. A Refinement Plan is developed to improve upon some aspect of a previously-developed System Plan. There are certain specific requirements for a System Plan which can be satisfied by the entire content of the plan itself, or by showing that elements absent from the plan have been addressed in City ordinances or its Comprehensive Plan. Happily, Pearson's research established that all the System Plan requirements had been met, either in the Plan itself, or in City ordinances. Total cost of the Plan to date is $63,700. $56,693 was paid under the grant, and $7,007 by the City as its 11 percent match. The plan envisions growth in transportation needs through the year 2030. The Plan contains several street maps, all from an aerial photo with streets enhanced. One map shows functional classifications of Bay City streets, and others are annotated to point out various features in town. Also contained in the plan are redesign diagrams for highway intersections at Warren, McCoy, Fifth/Portland, and Hayes Oyster Drive; street cross sections for each of the street functional classifications; and proposed bicycle routes. The Commission heard testimony by Tom Imhoff, who recently retired from the City of Portland's Roads Department. Imhoff expressed concern that aspects of the Plan might impart too much of an urban quality to Bay City. Policy in the Comprehensive Plan requires development in Bay City to be consistent with the City's rural coastal character. Imhoff intimated that Bay City might be trying to go too far too fast. Bike facilities needn't be as formalized as in the plan, he said, and full improvement of the streets, as envisioned in the Plan, are not appropriate in Bay City. Imhoff recommended allowing for gravel streets, which the Plan does not address. Imhoff was especially concerned about traffic calming measures suggested in the plan, and urged caution when designing chicanes or bump-outs for downtown streets. These narrow the streets and make it difficult for delivery trucks to serve downtown businesses. He recommended against installing speed bumps, and asked whether the Fire Department had been consulted on the Plan. Imhoff opposed creation of a roads district to pay for maintenance and improvement of Bay City streets, recommending instead that street improvements be funded through revenue bonds and Local Improvement Districts. Imhoff's property consists of agricultural forest land zoned Low Intensity. Such zoning, he said, would cause a severe increase in his property taxes. Also testifying before the Commission were Ingrid Weisenbach, ODOT district manager, and Liane Welch, Bay City resident and Tillamook County Roads Department Director. Several on the Commission expressed concern that the Plan did not accomplish a highway speed reduction to 35 mph through the downtown area of Bay City. Commissioner Terry Spath strongly supported reduction of speed to 35 mph and establishment of crosswalks where pedestrians could cross the highway safely. Bay City is the only city on the Oregon Coast which is completely bisected by U.S. 101, with no provision for pedestrian crossings. Spath said he likes to take his dog for walks along the railroad right-of-way, and takes his life in his hands getting there.		Another disappointment was the apparent reluctance of ODOT to reduce speed to 45 mph south of Alderbrook Road. The highway runs through a corridor, with Bay City limits lining both sides of the highway. Bay City streets from moderate and high intensity zones empty into U.S. 101 where highway speeds are 55 mph. One commissioner referred to ODOT's logic for not reducing speeds in that area as "idiotic." Welch opposed reducing highway speeds to 35 mph through downtown Bay City, and Weisenbach postulated that if highway traffic speed is to be reduced, the highway should be made to appear as if it were actually passing through a city. That would involve installing islands and raised dividers. Weisenbach and Welch both commented that speed signs alone would not cause a reduction of highway speed. The greatest concern of Commission members and some in the audience was that the street maps furnished with the plan are all incorrect. ODOT had provided the maps for Parametrix to include in the plan. The Commissioners objected particularly to incorporating the incorrect functional street classification map in the Comprehensive Plan to replace the map on page 31. Among the errors on the map were: Showing Union Street connecting 9^th Street and the highway; showing Portland Avenue going past 9^th Street to Baseline Road; showing 9^th Street connecting with E Street; showing 8^th Street running from Portland Avenue to D Street; incorrectly displaying the east end of Main Street; failing to show the Dew Pointe subdivision. One Commissioner expressed concern that the diagrams of proposed redesigns of the four highway intersections would become policy statements if the diagrams were to become part of the Comprehensive Plan, effectively preventing future design changes without first doing another Comprehensive Plan modification. Also lacking from the Plan is improved connectivity between north and south parts of town without using the highway for short distance travel. This had been a goal of the Plan, but deemed infeasible at this time because of the City's topography. Lacking also is a second exit from the Goose Point area. Topography may be faulted for this as well, plus the presence of a railroad, unused but not abandoned. The PAC had considered one possible emergency egress route from Goose Point, a private short road which had served the old electric substation. To use this exit route, however, Goose Point residents would have to traverse a "causeway" separating two sewage treatment lagoon cells. The causeway would collapse during a major earthquake, rendering the exit useless. In spite of the shortcomings described above, the Plan does contain some beneficial material. It provides a roadmap and cost estimates for improving the downtown streetscapes and city entrances; offers guidance on achieving long-term goals; provides recommendations and cost estimates for a pedestrian bridge over U.S. 101; recommends funding mechanisms to carry out the Plan; and incorporates the Downtown Transportation Plan developed by CH2M-Hill in 2003. There was also concern among the members of the Commission that ODOT, which had designed the flawed intersections with U.S. 101 to begin with, should pay for the revisions and improvements to those intersections as outlined in the Plan. But the major benefit in adopting the Plan is its value in securing future grants to make actual street improvements during the next 20 years. After considerable discussion, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Plan, but with certain exceptions: 1) That the street functional classification map provided by the contractor be rejected and replaced by a plat map with arterial and collector streets indicated, all other streets to be considered local streets, the annotated plat map to be replaced by a corrected map provided by Parametrix; and 2) that the intersection and other diagrams in the plan be regarded as conceptual only. City Planner Pearson presented a list of corrections she would submit to Parametrix, to make final corrections to the Plan.
Back

Home \| The Back Fence \| Past Issues of Grapevine \| Contact \| Slug's Eye View \| History \| Links Website design and maintenance: WEB