HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B: Street Design Standards for the Crest Drive Neighborhood
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Work Session: Street Design Standards for the Crest Drive Neighborhood
Meeting Date: September 19, 2007 Agenda Item Number: B
Department: Public Works Engineering Staff Contact: Mark Schoening, Lisa Gardner
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5243, 682-5208
ISSUE STATEMENT
The purpose of this work session is to provide information on the City’s Design Standards and
Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways to aid the council in deciding
whether the design standard pertaining to minimum street width should be reduced from 20 feet to 18
feet in the Crest Drive Neighborhood.
BACKGROUND
City Council Action History
The City Council adopted the November 1999 Eugene Street Classification Map with the adoption of
Ordinance Number 20181 on November 22, 1999. The streets in the Crest Drive Neighborhood were
left unclassified pending a study to determine the appropriate classifications and design standards for the
neighborhood. Attachment A is a map of the Crest Drive Neighborhood.
The City Council adopted Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways
and Accessways (Arterial and Collector Street Plan and Local Street Plan) with the adoption of
Resolution Number 4608 on November 22, 1999. The minimum street width allowed under the design
standards for local streets and neighborhood collector streets is 20 feet.
The City Council directed the City Manager to implement the Crest Drive Neighborhood context
sensitive solutions (CSS) process on May 8, 2006. A General Fund appropriation of $240,000 was
approved as part of the FY07 budget to fund the CSS process. The definition of CSS follows:
Context sensitive solutions is a collaborative, interdisciplinary project development approach
that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting
while maintaining safety and mobility for all users, and reflecting community needs. The goal of
CSS is to create early, open, honest, and continuous communication and sharing of information
and knowledge throughout the design process.
The City Council appropriated an additional $58,000 as part of Supplemental Budget #1 of FY07 to
expand the scope of the CSS process to include Middle Crest.
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070919\S070919B.doc
Context Sensitive Solutions Process History
After several months of work, the members of the Crest Drive Community Team (CDCT) approved
their group operating agreements for the CSS process for the Crest Drive neighborhood. There are 21
members of the CDCT including two City staff: Lisa Gardner, Planning Director and Mark Schoening,
City Engineer. The CDCT developed group agreements addressing decision-making, meetings,
communication and support. Each member of the CDCT signed the group agreements. The CDCT also
developed a mission statement that reads:
To recommend a street design for the identified sections of Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and
Friendly Street using the context sensitive solutions process while taking into consideration the
entire neighborhood context.
To support the design efforts of the CDCT the City conducted a topographic survey of all of the streets
under consideration, including all of the trees within the public right-of-way. The City’s survey crew
surveyed 15,846 data points including the existing edge of pavement, property corners, public and
private utilities, structures, and trees. All of this survey information was used to generate a set of maps
to aid in the street design process. The maps also included information on the existing pavement width
which is shown on Attachment B.
The design process involved City staff working with five separate street teams on five separate street
segments – Upper Crest, Middle Crest, Lower Crest, Storey and Friendly. Each street team presented its
conceptual design to the entire CDCT. As part of the design process, each street team evaluated its
design using the Themes and Values (Attachment C) developed and approved by the CDCT.
Over the course of two CDCT meetings on June 28 and July 12, the CDCT reached consensus on the
conceptual design for all five street segments. However, the CDCT did not reach agreement on the
overall design concept because of an outstanding issue regarding the minimum street width. Through a
consensus-based decision process, the CDCT has determined that there are compelling reasons to
support a minimum street width of 18 feet (two nine-foot travel lanes.) Reasons supporting the
recommendation include the CDCT’s themes and values regarding preserved neighborhood livability,
reduction of traffic speeds, efficient use of urban land in a rural setting, increased safety for all modes of
use, and focus on a footprint that fits the neighborhood's character. As such, an 18-foot street width is
.
perceived to be more consistent with the CDCT's adopted themes and values than a 20-foot street width
Based on these collaboratively developed values, it is the consensus recommendation of the CDCT to
pursue a legislative change to the minimum street width (18 feet rather than the prescribed minimum of
20 feet) prior to making a decision on the overall design concept
RELATED CITY POLICIES
Transplan Goal #2: Transportation System Characteristics
Enhance the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area’s quality of life and economic opportunity by
providing a transportation system that is:
a.Balanced
b.Accessible
c.Efficient
d.Safe
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070919\S070919B.doc
e.Interconnected
f.Environmentally responsible
g.Supportive of responsible and sustainable development
h.Responsive to community needs and neighborhood impacts
i.Economically viable and financially stable
COUNCIL OPTIONS
The council may:
1.Direct the City Manager to hold a public hearing on street design standards for the Crest Drive
Neighborhood on October 15, 2007.
2.Confirm that the street design standards in the Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets,
Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways are appropriate for the Crest Drive Neighborhood.
3.Take no action.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends that the council hold a public hearing on street design standards for the
Crest Drive Neighborhood.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to direct the City Manager to hold a public hearing on street design standards for the Crest Drive
Neighborhood.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Map of the Crest Drive Neighborhood
B Table Summary of Existing Pavement Width
C Crest Drive Community Team Themes and Values
D Memo from Kurt Corey, Public Works Director
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Mark Schoening
Telephone: 682-5243
Staff E-Mail: mark.a.schoening@ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2007 Council Agendas\M070919\S070919B.doc
W 29TH AVE
W 30TH AVE
W 31ST AVE
W 34TH AVE
W 34TH AVE
COURTNEY
W 35TH AVE
HIONDA
W 35TH PL
W 36TH AVE
W 37TH AVE
W 37TH AVE
W 38TH AVE
W 38TH AVE
W 40TH AVE
CSS STREETS
CREST STUDY AREA
Crest Drive Street Sections Under 20 Feet
Street SectionRangeTotal FtTotal Ft < 20% < 20
Lower Crest18-2515501107.0%
Middle Crest18-26220042019.0%
Upper Crest20-2285000.0%
Storey18-27270537013.6%
Friendly17-34165073044.0%
Crest Drive Community Team Themes and Values
ValuesPhysical Aspects
Protect existing trees, canopy, critical root
zone, biomass
Environmental and Ecological Value:
Enhance stream corridors, filter water using
Preserve natural character of neighborhood
Best Management Practices
Revegetate, prevent erosion
(Trees, vegetation, habitat, stream corridors, etc.) Build habitat
Invasive species removal and habitat
enhancement
Slow moving traffic
Balance of pavement and green structure
Aesthetic, Cultural and Historic Value:
Maintain rural views and relationship to natural
Preserve country feel in the city
contours
(Country lane feel, historic homes and land) Maintain views and context of historic homes,
parks and roadway
Minimize realignment of road horizontally
Slow traffic
Visibility
Functional Value:
Emergency access
Safety for all modes and all users
Safe alternative modes locations
Safe for people and the environment Stormwater management and street grading
(ice)
Utility placement
Traffic calming and slow speed street design
Appropriately scaled lighting, strategic
placement
Spiritual Value:
Thoughtful design for multiple modes – not
“Livability” in balance with “mobility”
just cars
Emphasize “people-centric” design for neighborhood
Maintain and enhance livability of adjacent
(as opposed to CAR – centric)
homes and properties
Ecology and environment are in balance with
presence of traffic in neighborhood
Transportation improvements appropriately
chosen and scaled to address project goals
Economic Value:
yet avoid unnecessary financial burden for
Balance of design features with financial expenditures
adjacent property owners.
and economic value to adjacent neighbors Transportation improvements considered in
balance with impacts to adjacent property
values.
ATTACHMENT D
Public Works
Administration
M
City of Eugene
EMORANDUM
858 Pearl Street
Eugene, Oregon 97401
(541) 682-5241
(541) 682-6826 FAX
www.eugene-or.gov
th
Date: September 19, 2007
To: Mayor Piercy and City Councilors
From: Kurt Corey, Public Works Director
Subject: Transportation Facility Design Standards
Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways
The minimum street width allowed in the Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets,
Sidewalks, Bikeways, and Accessways (Arterial and Collector Street Plan and Local Street Plan) is
20 feet (two ten-foot travel lanes). There is a set of criteria for exceptions to the minimum street
width. The criteria for exceptions include:
?
Topography or slope constraints;
?
Significant trees or vegetation;
?
Other natural resource constraints, including wetlands, wildlife habitat, etc.;
?
Historic resources
?
Insufficient right-of-way, and inability to obtain additional right-of-way at reasonable cost
and within a reasonable time frame for the project;
?
Adopted Council policies, including those found in neighborhood plans.
It is staff’s determination that none of the criteria for exceptions that would warrant a minimum street
width of less than 20 feet are met for the streets included in the CSS process. This determination was
made in part by the comprehensive topographic survey conducted as part of the CSS process. The
topographic survey identified natural resources, trees, topographic constraints, public and private
utilities, existing pavement, and public right of way. Page two of this memo compares pavements of
20 feet and 18 feet using the exception criteria.
The Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways, and Accessways were
adopted by Council resolution with a provision that the Design Standards and Guidelines could be
amended administratively. Because of the adverse impacts to safety and efficiency associated with a
minimum street width of 18 feet, it was the determination of City staff that it would be inappropriate
to pursue an administrative amendment to the Design Standards and Guidelines.
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT D
Exception Criteria 18’ Street Section Compared to 20’ Street
Section
Topography or slope constraints The topography and slope constraints are the
same for either street section.
Significant trees or other vegetation The impacts to trees are the same for either
street section.
Other natural resource constraints, including Neither street section affects any Goal 5
wetlands, wildlife habitat, etc. resources or wetlands. The impacts to wildlife
habitat would be the same.
Historic resources The two identified historic resources – Morse
Ranch and the cemetery are not affected by
either street section.
Insufficient right of way, and inability to obtain The right of way is generally 60 feet wide and
additional right of way at reasonable cost and either street section easily fits within the
within a reasonable time frame for the project existing right of way.
Adopted Council policies, including those Not applicable. The only policy regarding
found in neighborhood plans. street width is found within the
Arterial/Collector and Local Street Plans. The
only applicable neighborhood plan is the South
Hills Plan and it does not include anything on
street width.
Page 2 of 2