1. 9 TH STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN Corvallis Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) Ali Bonakdar

2. 9 th Street Improvement Plan Background The 1996 City of Corvallis Transportation Plan recommends improvements of safety and access management for 9 th Street; In FY2008 CAMPO applied for a Transportation & Growth Management (TGM) grant for the improvement of 9 th Street.

3. PURPOSE To improve operation for all modes; To improve Access Management. To improve safety To incorporate recommendations into the City of Corvallis Land Development Code.

4. APPROACH Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Public Involvement Technical Review and Analysis Hiring Consultant

5. Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Corvallis City Council Corvallis PWD Corvallis Transportation Division Corvallis Community Development CAMPO & OCWCOG Planners ODOT TGM Business Owners Neighborhood Organization CBUF (Ex-Officio)

6. Announced in GT Held Public Meeting to identify issues Created 9 th Street Webpage www.corvallisareampo.org Provided Commenting Opportunities Sent Direct Mail to Business/Property Owners Held Meetings w/ Business/Property owners Compiled Editorial and Letter to Editor Held Public Meeting on recommendations Held PAC Meetings Notified Business/Property Owners and Interested Public on the Planning Commission Meeting Presented to the Corvallis Planning Commission Public Involvement

7. Deficiencies and Issues - General Unfriendly to Pedestrian Crossing Unfriendly to Biking Too Many Access Points Lacks Trees Too Commercially Developed Overhanging Wires & Signs

8. Deficiencies and Issues - Specific Congestion @ 9 th &Circle Congestion @ 9 th &Conifer Pedestrian crossing around Corvallis Market Center Visual obstructions

9. Inventory of Existing Conditions –Land use & Zoning, Vacant Land, Major Activity Centers Demographics –Population, Employment Access Inventory –Public, Private Technical Review

10. Transportation System –Streets, Sidewalks, Marked Crossings, Bicycle Facilities, Transit, Parking’ Traffic Volume’ Major Trip Generators, Crash Study Consultant: Traffic Operation –Intersection Analysis –Traffic Signals Technical Review

11. Alternative Design Considered

12. Access Management Measures Considered

13. Measures Considered Access Management Measures Considered

14. Recommendations 1.Walking Improvements: –Widen substandard sidewalks 5’ both sides –5 Pedestrian Crossings (S. 3 rd St. Type) Reiman-FremontBuchannan-GrantGrant-GarfieldGarfield-Circle Circle and Walnut –Study location of existing signal at Polk 2.Biking Improvements –Widen bike lanes to 6’ when ROW available –Bike lane on Grant between 9 th -10 th St. –Monitor presence of debris

15. Recommendations 3.Transit Improvements –Increase bus shelters –Provide for safe walking to bus stops 4.Landscaping Improvements –Encourage business to plant appropriate trees –Adhere to the 12 foot planter strip required by the Code –Enforce the Maintenance of Planter Strips 5.Access Management –Reduce number of driveways (Eliminate, Consolidate, Relocate) –Require right-in-right-out channelization

16. 6.Traffic Flow Improvements –Implement consultant recommendations on additional turning lanes –Coordinate Traffic Lights 7.Signs and Hanging Wires –Enforce City Ordinance –Seek opportunities to minimize visual impacts 8.Land Use Improvements –“Smart Growth Development” (mixed use, parking in rear, façade facing street, emphasize Alternative Modes) Recommendations

17. Implementation Identified: Possible Funding Sources Required Funding Processes Cost of Implementation

18. Questions?