805 boc sr watt 091515 - washington county, oregon · memorandum . to: theresa cherniak, washington...

Memorandum

To: Theresa Cherniak, Washington County Planning Manager

From: Nora M. Curtis, Clean Water Services Conveyance Department Director

Date: July 27, 2015

Subject: Position Statement for Primary Road 2, North Bethany Subarea Master Plan Amendment

Introduction

Clean Water Services (the “District”) is proposing to restore a stream reach, adjacent wetlands, and associated vegetated corridor (the “project”) in the Bethany Creek Basin within the North Bethany Subarea. In order to ensure the success of this project, it is necessary to modify certain elements of the North Bethany Subarea Plan.

Description of the Proposed Modifications

• Remove the segment of Primary Street P2 running from Street P3 to Kaiser Road.

• Remove the eastern trail crossing of the Bethany Creek stream corridor; adjust the location of the western trail crossing of the corridor to a more central location.

• Retain the open space area and trail corridor that run along the northern edge of the Bethany Creek stream and wetland corridor from Street P3 to Kaiser Road; refine the trail alignment in this corridor.

Project Description

The goal of the Bethany Creek Enhancement Project is to improve ecosystem services by increasing species diversity, wildlife habitat, and stormwater management functions within the riparian corridor. The project will enhance the stream, wetland, and surrounding vegetated corridor restoring natural and historic features to this highly altered creek system. Additionally, the project will allow for an integrated trail network through and around the project area providing education and passive recreation opportunities.

The project area encompasses slightly under 6 acres and contains the existing Bethany Creek and associated wetlands. The project area is situated east of Kaiser Road and west of Primary Road P3. In recent history, this area was used for agricultural production. The existing “creek”

1 | P a g e

Attachment A

is a straight, narrow and uniformly constructed channel that bisects the site. The remainder of the site consists of degraded wetlands, pasture and invasive herbaceous vegetation.

The intent of the project is to restore this area’s natural function to be more in alignment with its likely historic characteristics. Based on historic context and similar reference sites, the project team envisions this site would have consisted of a broad valley swale dominated by shrubs and trees. Beaver likely moved through the reach creating multiple ponds with emergent and open water habitats.

The District plans to restore the area with the following objectives:

• Improve wetland functions

• Improve ecological functions

• Improve downstream stability

• Create opportunities for people to interact with the enhancement area through the creation of an effective network of trails and viewpoints.

As part of the planning stages of this project the District received concurrence on the delineation of wetlands within the project area. The wetlands within the project area were found to be larger than those shown on the Significant Natural & Cultural Resources Map of the North Bethany Subarea Plan, particularly the wetland area near the planned intersection of Primary Street P2 and Kaiser Road. The planned alignment of Street P2 would impact the actual jurisdictional wetland and sever the associated vegetated corridor; reducing the area available for the stream restoration project.

Discussion of Options

The District has explored options for modifying the alignment of Street P2 in order to maximize natural resources enhancement and minimize impacts to existing resources including wetlands and associated vegetated corridors. As part of the project, two options were explored for the realignment of this segment of Street P2:

• Option 1: Realign P2 north to Street P10 and remove the planned P2-Kaiser Road intersection.

• Option 2: Remove the segment of P2 between Street P3 and Kaiser Road.

Option 2 is the preferred option to achieve the District’s goal of maximizing natural resources enhancement. In addition, this preferred option lowers financial obligations for the Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreational District (THPRD) on a portion of their property that will not be dedicated as the Community Park.

2 | P a g e

Attachment A

Previous Plan Modification to the alignment of Street P2 (ordinance 790) eliminated the western portion of the P2-Kaiser Road intersection. Traffic studies completed as a part of that modification indicated that the intersection would need to be a “right-in / right-out” configuration and not a full movement intersection as envisioned by the North Bethany Subarea Plan. With preferred Option 2 in mind, further traffic studies were performed to assess the traffic impacts of realigning P2 in the vicinity of the project north to Street P10 and eliminating the remaining, western leg of the P2-Kaiser Road intersection. Traffic analysis showed that the elimination of this intersection and the re-routing of traffic to the P10-Kaiser intersection had a negligible impact on the street network.

It also became evident that the traffic volumes on this realigned segment of P2 from P3 to P10 would be relatively small and that this segment of Primary Street P2 was not necessary from a traffic standpoint. Local roads constructed as part of future development between the Bethany Creek corridor and Street P10 could handle traffic generated by these developments as well as any pass-through traffic.

The Trails and Fixed Park area mapped in the North Bethany Subarea Plan are also affected by the project. The Park, Trails and Pedestrian Connections Map of the North Bethany Subarea Plan illustrates trails along the northern and southern edges of the Bethany Creek corridor. In addition, two trail crossings of the creek and wetlands are shown on this map.

This project proposes to keep the trail alignments along the northern and southern edges of the corridor in the same approximate location as shown on the Subarea Plan. It also proposes removing the easternmost trail crossing of the creek and wetland while shifting the western crossing to a more central location partway between Keizer Road and P3. Elimination of one of the two crossings in this short stream reach will reduce impacts to wetlands, vegetated corridor, and associated enhancements while still allowing for a pedestrian crossing of the creek corridor between Keizer Road and P3. Consolidation of the creek crossings is supported by THPRD.

The trail parallel to and north of Bethany Creek is an important east-west pedestrian and bicycle connection between neighborhoods and schools within North Bethany. A future trail crossing of Kaiser Road is shown on the Park, Trails and Pedestrian Connections Map. This crossing will occur either at-grade or as an under-crossing of the ultimate improved Kaiser Road. The Bethany Creek Enhancement Project will support either option.

A Fixed Park is shown on the Park, Trails and Pedestrian Connections Map of the North Bethany Subarea Plan as running along the northern edge of the project between the wetland area and the existing planned alignment of Street P2. With the removal of the segment of P2 between P3 and Kaiser Road, a larger open space and trail corridor area is potentially made available for viewpoints and trails.

3 | P a g e

Attachment A

Potential Benefits of the Proposed Modifications

• Improved pedestrian access The relatively more dense residential development required by the R-15NB and the R-24NB zones will afford the opportunity for multi-family residential and attached single family residential development to front on the trail corridor and open space. The current alignment of P2 acts as a barrier to pedestrian access from adjacent residential uses to the linear fixed park. Likewise, even a partial realignment of P2 will present the same obstacles. Removing this segment of P2 will allow for uninterrupted pedestrian access to the linear fixed park from adjacent development.

• Improved visual access The majority of the residential edge adjacent to the fixed park and open space is classified as Special Frontage Category C. This appears to be a mapping error, as Special Frontage Category A relates to buildings with frontage on streets adjacent to parks. The building architectural guidelines specified by Special Frontage Category A are intended to encourage “eyes on the open space”.

While it can be said that the removal of P2 potentially removes the opportunity for casual observation of the trail corridor and open space, alternative approaches exist to encourage “eyes on the open space”. The proposal does not preclude the alignment of a local street adjacent to all or a part of the creek and wetland corridor. These street alignments are best defined as part of a specific development proposal for any adjacent parcels. In addition, open space connections to adjacent development can be mandated at specific intervals to encourage pedestrian access and activity along the corridor. These connections will also provide visual portals into the passive open space area. This addresses the “eyes on the park” security issue and does not intrude on the passive nature of the open space.

An alternative to this preferred solution is to require that parcels directly to the north of the open space be developed with a local street or buildings that fronts on the open space. Specifically, require it within R-15NB zoned land which encompasses over 50% of the linear park/open space frontage. This would provide the public frontage along the open space, avoid impacts to wetland and buffer and minimize impacts to Linear Park area. This R-15NB land will be developed with town homes and the site could easily accommodate a town home development with an open space frontage street. This alternative also addresses the “eyes on the park” issue.

4 | P a g e

Attachment A

• Parking As a linear park/trail corridor, the fixed park adjacent to the project should not require on-street parking. The linear park is intended to function as a trail corridor punctuated by destinations in the form of viewpoints or pocket parks which will be used primarily by trail users and neighborhood residents.

• Expanded open space Removing this segment of P2 accommodates larger resource areas and allows for retention of larger open space and trail corridor. Larger contiguous natural spaces are more viable than smaller segregated spaces that may represent equivalent acreage; the preferred option offers this opportunity.

Public Input

The District provided two public outreach meetings – one hosted by CPO 7 at one of their regular meetings and the other by the District held at the Bethany Presbyterian Church in North Bethany. At the meetings, the District staff presented an overview of the Bethany Creek Enhancement Project and reviewed both options – one with a partial frontage road (P2) along the northern edge of the open space and one with P2 removed between P3 and Kaiser Road. Graphics illustrating the character of the restoration and enhancement were also presented. The Bethany Creek Enhancement Project was endorsed at both meetings and no one voiced concerns about the elimination of P2.

Summary

The District understands the importance of maintaining the critical network of parks, open spaces and significant resource lands in North Bethany. It also understands the importance of the road and trail circulation network as a way to move people throughout the community. The objectives of the project will enhance a significant natural resource, maintain visual access of open spaces, improve pedestrian access to open space and maintain the overall circulation objectives of the North Bethany Subarea Plan. The proposed project and plan modifications represent a very balanced approach that addresses the spirit of the North Bethany Plan and improves livability aspects for future residents.

5 | P a g e

Attachment A

List of attachments

Figure 1 – Context Diagram

Figure 2 – P2 and Trail Alignments per North Bethany Community Plan

Figure 3 – Preferred Option, Proposed Modifications to Street P2 and Trial Alignments

Figure 4 – Preferred Option, Remove P2 between P3 and Kaiser Rd.

Figure 5 – Oblique View of Proposed Enhancements

Figure 6 – Oblique View of Proposed Enhancements

Figure 7 – Oblique View of Exiting Project Area

Figure 8 – View Looking East (Proposed) & Existing View Looking East

6 | P a g e

Attachment A

Attachment A

Attachment A

Boyler

Sticky Note

None set by Boyler

Boyler

Sticky Note

Accepted set by Boyler

Boyler

Sticky Note

None set by Boyler

Boyler

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 5

Boyler

Sticky Note


Attachment A

Boyler

Sticky Note


Boyler

Sticky Note

None set by Boyler

Boyler

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 6

Boyler

Sticky Note

Completed set by Boyler

Attachment A

Boyler

Sticky Note


Boyler

Sticky Note

None set by Boyler

Boyler

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 7

Boyler

Sticky Note

Completed set by Boyler

Atta

chm

ent A

Boyler

Typewritten Text

Boyler

Typewritten Text

Boyler

Typewritten Text

Boyler

Typewritten Text

FIGURE 8

Attachment B

North Bethany Concept Area Project #: 17971

July 28, 2015 Page 2

Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon

rather than NW Kaiser Road, and recommends the proposed parallel regional trail to cross NW Kaiser

Road via an at-grade or under crossing.

Intent of North Bethany Community Plan

Figure 1 depicts the primary road network, open space, and fixed parks as adopted in the NBCP, with

the provision of engrossed ordinances No. 789 and 790. Per the NBCP and applicable in scale to the

proposed modifications, the intent of the area is as follows:

• Incorporate community design features and focal points that are connected to one another, to

adjacent points of interest, and to neighborhoods via multi-modal access routes.

Further, the site vicinity is within the Southeast Neighborhood, per the NBCP, which identifies the

primary design features, as follows:

� Main street (i.e., NW Kaiser Road between NW Springville Road and NW Brugger Road) and

the associated physical gateways,

� East Community Park,

� Regional trail and street connectivity between the Southeast and Springville neighborhoods;

and,

� Gateway at the Road A/NW Springville Road intersection.

The remainder of this memorandum discusses the proposed modifications to the adopted

transportation system as they relate to the elimination of P-2 between NW Kaiser Road and P-3 and the

regional trail pedestrian connections to NW Springville Road.

Attachment B

Attachment B




PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS

Clean Water Services has begun preliminary design for the planned stream enhancement and regional

stormwater approach project along Bethany Creek. During the course of the design phase, a wetland

delineation was completed, which resulted in a significantly larger wetland boundary than was

assumed in the NBCP. The proposed modifications to the transportation system listed below provides a

more feasible and safe multi-modal connection to NW Kaiser Road and NW Springville Road and

removes the closely spaced intersection created by P-2 and avoids impacts to the wetlands.

The P-2 and Regional Trail alignment modifications include the following:

• Eliminate the easterly P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection;

• Eliminate the segment of P-2 between P-3 and NW Kaiser Road, and reroute trips to the NW

Kaiser Road/NW Brugger Road intersection; and,

• Reduce north-south trail crossings that span Bethany Creek from the planned two crossings to

one crossing, and maintain alignment with southerly local roadways.

The proposed modifications to the transportation system provide a more feasible and safe multi-modal

connection to NW Kaiser Road and NW Springville Road while reducing impacts to wetlands. The

adopted concept plan and proposed modifications to the P-2 alignment and Regional Trail pedestrian

crossings are shown in Figure 2 and described in further detail herein.

Eliminate the P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection

As adopted through the NBCP, P-2 provides an east-west road connection between Road A to NW

Kaiser Road. As shown in Figure 1, the adopted alignment intersects with NW Kaiser Road

approximately 200 feet south of the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road intersection. The elimination of

the P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection is proposed to address the following considerations:

• Access spacing along NW Kaiser Road;; and,

• Geometric/topography conditions at the P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection.

A description of these considerations is provided herein.

Attachment B

Attachment B




Access Spacing Along NW Kaiser Road

As seen in Figure 2, the access spacing between the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road and P-2/NW

Kaiser Road intersections is approximately 200 feet. Per the Washington County 2035 Transportation

System Plan, NW Kaiser Road is classified as an arterial for which standard access spacing is 600 feet

(Reference 1). The following should be considered:

1. The 200-foot spacing between the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road and P-2/NW Kaiser Road

intersections does not accommodate the anticipated transitional curves and respective

northbound and southbound left-turn bay storage lengths. As such, the east leg of the P-2/NW

Kaiser Road intersection would likely be restricted to right-in/right-out movements, ultimately

limiting direct southbound access to the NW Kaiser Road/NW Springville intersection which is a

primary node to travel south to Highway 26. As such, southbound-destined traffic would

reroute to the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road intersection.

2. Northbound queues at the future signalized NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road intersection are

anticipated to be present based on future volumes along NW Kaiser Road and at the

intersection. As such, an intersection 200 feet downstream may experience queue spillback

from the upstream signal.

While increasing the access spacing between the two intersections would address these concerns,

there are environmentally sensitive areas to the south of the P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection. Bethany

Creek and jurisdictional wetlands are located to the south of the intersection acting as natural barriers.

Geometric/Topography Conditions at the P-2/NW Kaiser Road Intersection

There is currently a ten percent (10%) grade along NW Kaiser Road in the vicinity of the planned P-2

intersection. In order to accommodate an intersection at the proposed location, a flat or near flat

landing will need to be provided. Providing this landing will further increase the slope of the roadway

between Rock Creek and NW Brugger Road as there will be less space to accommodate the elevation

change.

As shown in Figure 3, a 12% grade is required between the P-2 alignment and NW Brugger Road. This

12% grade will then transition to the landing’s grade of 5%. Per roadway design principles, it’s

preferable to avoid locating intersections close to steep grades with vertical crests due to sight distance

concerns.

Proposed Elimination of P-2 Between NW Kaiser Road and P3

As shown in Figure 2, the elimination of P-2 between P-3 and NW Kaiser Road would significantly

reduce impacts to wetlands. The provision of local streets in place of P-2 would maintain access to

planned residential developments north of Bethany Creek and east of NW Kaiser Road.

Attachment B




Considering the likely turning movement restrictions for the planned P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection,

the proposed elimination of P-2 between P-3 and NW Kaiser Road will have limited impact to the east-

west connectivity between Road A and NW Kaiser Road. The following section documents an

operational analysis to determine the potential level of impact on the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser

Road intersection.

The operational analysis evaluates two scenarios under year 2035 future conditions based on future

funding allocation, as follows:

1. With the Road “A” connection to NW 185th

Avenue

2. Without the Road “A” connection to NW 185th

Avenue

Future Year 2035 Traffic Conditions

The following section documents the 2035 traffic conditions, including an operational sensitivity

analysis with and without the P-2 alignment at NW Kaiser Road.

2035 Volume Development

The Washington County 2035 Travel Demand Model for the North Bethany area (model) was used to

develop volumes for the forecast 2035 weekday PM peak period. The model includes the Road “A” and

NW Springville Road intersections along NW Kaiser Road. In order to analyze intersections along the

NW Kaiser Road corridor, a volume distribution based on known planned developments was assumed

for intersections located along NW Kaiser Road between Road “A” and NW Springville Road. The 2035

turning movement volumes for the Road “A”/NW Kaiser Road and NW Springville Road/NW Kaiser

Road intersections are shown in Figure 4. The volume distribution along the NW Kaiser Road corridor

intersections, assuming both Road “A” scenarios, is also shown in Figure 4.

Appendix “A” includes the base 2010 and forecast 2035 travel demand model outputs for the North

Bethany area.

Attachment B

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 10


Level-of-Service Analysis

The NW Kaiser Road corridor was analyzed using Synchro 8 with and without the P-2 alignment at NW

Kaiser Road. The Road “A”/NW Kaiser Road and NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road intersections were

modeled as signalized intersections with an exclusive left-turn lane and shared through-right lane on

each approach. The P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection was modeled as a three leg intersection,

assuming the realignment on the west per engrossed ordinance No. 790, with right-in/right-out

movement restriction. The remaining three intersections were modeled as full movement, single lane

approaches with the minor street stop controlled. The following two scenarios were evaluated:

1. Road “A” extends to NW 185th

Avenue by year 2035.

2. Road “A” does not extend to NW 185th

Avenue by year 2035. Without this connection,

additional trips assumed for NW 185th

Avenue or NW Germantown Road will be routed to NW

Kaiser Road.

As shown in Figure 5, all intersections along the NW Kaiser Road corridor continue to operate within

Washington County operating thresholds. To evaluate a reasonable “worst-case” scenario, all traffic

routed through the P-2 alignment was re-routed to the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road intersection.

Figure 5 also summarizes the 2035 traffic operations with and without the P-2 alignment under the two

Road “A” scenarios. Appendix “B” includes the Synchro level-of-service worksheets.

Attachment B

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 12


Regional Trail Pedestrian Crossings

As shown in Figure 2, Clean Water Services is proposing that the two north-south regional trail

crossings along Bethany Creek within the site vicinity, be combined to one crossing. The continued trail

crossing is to remain aligned with local street connections to the south, within the Polygon residential

developments, and south of NW Springville Road to the existing residential developments.

The regional trail alignment proposed by Clean Water Services assumes that the trail connection from

the west maintains the P-2 alignment, either as an at-grade or under crossing, per ordinance No. 790.

The regional trail crossing realignments are proposed based on the following considerations:

1. Out-of-Direction travel for pedestrians/bicyclists

2. Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands

Out-of-Direction Travel

The proposal maintains north-south regional trail alignments along Bethany Creek thereby avoiding

out-of-direction travel for pedestrians which would otherwise be introduced through a trail

realignment to the future signalized NW Kaiser Road/NW Springville Road intersection. As such, north-

south pedestrian/bicyclist connectivity is maintained within the site vicinity.

Wetland Impacts

Regional trail crossings along Bethany Creek introduce notable wetland impacts with necessary crossing

infrastructure, including bridges or culverts. Reducing the number of crossings minimizes the impacts to

jurisdictional wetlands.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 13


POLICY COMPLIANCE

This section provides findings regarding the proposed modifications to Primary Street 2 (P-2) and the

parallel regional trail system within the North Bethany Concept Plan (NBCP) compliance with the

Washington County 2035 Transportation System Plan and the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule

(OAR 600-012-0060).

Washington County Transportation System Plan 2014

Per discussions with Washington County staff, the following objectives and strategies from the

Washington County Transportation System Plan 2014 were determined to be relevant to the proposed

modifications. The relevant objectives and strategies are provided below in italics with our responses

shown in standard font.

Objective 1.1: Provide a transportation system that is structurally and operationally safe for all users

and all modes.

Strategy 1.1.1 Plan, engineer, design and construct the transportation system using accepted

design standards that promote safety and that provide the intended multi-modal function as

indicated in the TSP and the Road Design and Construction Standards.

Response: As shown in Figure 5, the proposed P-2 modifications have minimal effects on

vehicular operations and continues to meet applicable standards. The proposed regional trail

system modifications continue to provide north-south connectivity and adhere to multi-modal

functions along the roadways.

Strategy 1.1.2 Regularly inspect the transportation system to identify and correct safety

deficiencies.

Response: Not Applicable

Strategy 1.1.3 Use the Maintenance Priority Matrix to help prioritize maintenance and safety

expenditures.


Strategy 1.1.4 Where and when practicable, separate travel modes and minimize conflicts

between and within modes.

Response: The proposed P-2 modifications eliminate potential vehicular and pedestrian/bicycle

conflicts between P-13 and NW Kaiser Road. As such, the proposed modifications enhance the

pedestrian environment and maintains the currently envisioned north-south and east-west

connectivity.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 14


Strategy 1.1.5 Limit sign clutter by utilizing the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices or

other appropriate standards for the design and placement of traffic signs.


Objectives 3.1: Strive to maintain and enhance the livability of existing and future communities and

neighborhoods.

Strategy 3.1.1 When considering transportation improvements that create new, expanded or

extended roadways, evaluate and balance the needs of the traveling public with the livability

and viability of neighborhoods, business districts, agricultural areas, historic places and other

cultural resources.

Response: The proposed P-2 and regional trail system modifications minimize the impacts to

the designated wetlands along Bethany Creek. In addition, as documented herein, the proposed

modifications do not introduce any additional out-of-direction travel for any mode. As such, the

livability and viability of neighborhoods in the North Bethany Plan Area is maintained.

Strategy 3.1.2 Strive to limit inappropriate through-traffic and speeding in residential areas

using the Neighborhood Streets Program, while maintaining adequate neighborhood and

emergency access.

Response: The proposed P-2 and regional trail system modifications avoids impacts to Oregon

Department of State Lands (DSL) concurred jurisdictional wetlands along Bethany Creek. In

addition, as documented herein, the proposed modifications do not introduce any additional

out-of-direction travel for any mode. As such, the livability and viability of neighborhoods in the

North Bethany Plan Area is maintained.

Strategy 3.1.3 Consider low-impact strategies to improve traffic flow including appropriate

lane-markings, safety improvements, roundabouts and other operational devices.


Strategy 3.1.4 Identify scenic view corridors and vistas, and strive to maintain and enhance

these visual resources for residents and users of the transportation system.

Response: The proposed modifications to the regional trail system adheres to the North

Bethany Community Plan by maintaining viewing platforms along Bethany Creek.

Strategy 3.1.5 Follow federal and state regulations and guidelines on reducing transportation-

related noise.


Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 15


Strategy 3.1.6 Work with appropriate entities to identify, avoid and/or mitigate negative

impacts on the community from airport, rail freight, pipeline and electric transmission projects.


Strategy 3.1.7 Regulate the provision of parking as identified in the Community Development

Code (CDC).


Objective 3.2: Coordinate transportation and land use planning.

Strategy 3.2.1 Plan and provide a multi-modal transportation system that encourages the land

uses, mixes and densities indicated in the Comprehensive Plan, community plans and/or other

applicable, adopted land use plans.

Response: The currently proposed P-2 alignment utilizes additional right-of-way that indirectly

reduces the overall development potential of the parcels on which the P-2 alignment crosses.

However, the proposed modifications of P-2 and the regional trail system enable the

development of an equal or potentially increased number of residential units.

Strategy 3.2.2 Plan for the anticipated multi-modal travel demand generated by proposed

development within and near Washington County.

Response: As shown in Figure 5, the proposed P-2 modification minimally affects vehicular

operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035, thereby

accommodating future vehicular travel demand. In addition, the pedestrian and bicycle travel

demand will continue to be accommodated through the proposed regional trail crossing

modifications.

Strategy 3.2.3 Explore opportunities to further improve accessibility, including jobs/housing

balances, through integrated transportation and land use solutions.


Objective 4.2: Reduce and/or mitigate negative impacts of the transportation system on the natural

environment.

Strategy 4.2.1 Identify, and first avoid, then limit and/or mitigate adverse impacts of

transportation projects on mapped Significant Natural Resources.

Response: The proposed P-2 and regional trail system modifications avoid impacts to DSL

concurred jurisdictional wetlands along Bethany Creek.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 16


Strategy 4.2.2 Transportation improvements are to be developed consistent with Oregon

statewide planning goals and administrative rules, when establishing general transportation

alignments, unless a special exception is allowed.

Response: The Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 012-660) is addressed in the subsequent

section.

Strategy 4.2.3 Washington County’s Department of Land Use & Transportation Project Review

Committee shall review transportation project applications for completeness and compliance

with applicable regulations.

Response: Not Applicable.

Strategy 4.2.4 Consider the temporary and long-term impacts of construction and maintenance

activities on the natural environment and adopt practices that mitigate these impacts.



Strategy 4.2.5 Consider and incorporate as appropriate context-sensitive design treatments

that reduce and/or mitigate transportation impacts including surface stormwater management

features and impervious surface reductions.



Strategy 4.2.6 In agricultural areas avoid and/or limit significant disruption of farming activities

during both project implementation and maintenance, in accordance with Policy 15 of the

Rural/Natural Resource Plan, as appropriate.


Strategy 4.2.7 Consider existing natural hazards, as well as potential future natural hazards,

during the design and engineering of transportation improvements.


Objective 5.1: Provide a roadway system that is cost-effective, designed to operate efficiently, and

serves all travel modes.

Strategy 5.1.3: Address potential impacts of long-distance trips on neighborhoods or

communities by: A) Ensuring that the collectors and arterials of the transportation system are

designed to adequately accommodate these trips. B) Designing and managing local streets to

accommodate local trips and to discourage long-distance trips.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 17



operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035. Considering the

limited access spacing between the currently proposed P-2 alignment at NW Kaiser Road and

the NW Kaiser Road/NW Brugger Road intersection, the currently proposed P-2 alignment

would likely be restricted to right-in/right-out. As such, the proposed elimination of P-2

between NW Kaiser Road and P-13 would have minimal impact to travel time and east-west

connectivity thereby not introducing long-distance trips on the neighborhood.

Objective 5.3: Utilize the Interim Washington County Motor Vehicle Performance Measures to manage

congestion.

Strategy 5.3.1 Provide a transportation system that accommodates travel demand consistent

with applicable performance standards for all modes of travel where feasible.


operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035. The regional trail

system modifications do not introduce out-of-direction travel for non-motorized modes.

Strategy 5.3.2 Provide a roadway system that meets the mobility needs of Washington County

residents and businesses, as defined by performance standards identified in Interim Washington

County Motor Vehicle Performance Measures of this plan.


operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035.

Strategy 5.3.3 Implement Washington County projects necessary to improve performance and

reduce system design deficiencies in roadway corridors and segments that are operating or

forecasted to operate at less than acceptable standards as identified in the Interim Washington

County Motor Vehicle Performance Measures.


operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035.

Strategy 5.3.4 Implement Washington County’s Comprehensive Plan, including the review of

development applications, as defined by the performance standards identified in the Interim

Washington County Motor Vehicle Performance Measures of this plan.


Strategy 5.3.5 Help provide a roadway system that addresses travel demand associated with

anticipated new development or redevelopment, by applying appropriate access management

standards as defined and required within the Community Development Code (CDC).

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 18



operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035. The access

spacing between the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road and P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersections

is approximately 200 feet. Per the Washington County 2035 Transportation System Plan, NW

Kaiser Road is classified as an arterial for which standard access spacing is 600 feet. Therefore,

the proposed P-2 modifications would no longer require a variance from Washington County

spacing standards.

Strategy 5.3.6 Recognize that flexibility is necessary and it may not be desirable or practicable

to meet the interim level-of-service standard in all cases.


Objective 6.1: Provide an accessible, multi-modal transportation system that meets the needs of the

community.

Strategy 6.1.1 Coordinate with private and public developers and the public to provide access

via a safe, efficient, and appropriately balanced system of complete streets.

Response: The public involvement process of this legislative plan amendment has been

approved by Washington County planning staff and involved coordination with adjacent

property owners, known development interests, Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District, CPO

7, and the neighborhood.

Strategy 6.1.2 Encourage modifications that bring driveway and other access points into

compliance or closer to compliance with applicable standards.

Response: The access spacing between the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road and P-2/NW

Kaiser Road intersections is approximately 200 feet. Per the Washington County 2035

Transportation System Plan, NW Kaiser Road is classified as an arterial for which standard

access spacing is 600 feet. Therefore, the proposed P-2 modifications would no longer require a

variance from Washington County spacing standards.

Strategy 6.1.3 As appropriate, require development adjacent to transit routes, and within

transit oriented districts, to provide direct pedestrian and bicycle access to transit, including

street crossings.


Strategy 6.1.4 Provide or encourage enhanced or improved pedestrian and bicycle street

crossings in locations where demand for crossing is apparent, conflicts between vehicles and

pedestrians or bicycles have been observed, and safe operational conditions can be maintained

for all modes after installation. Such crossings are preferred at intersections. Mid-block crossings

of county roadways must meet applicable warrants.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 19


Response: Engrossed ordinance No. 790, realigns P-2 to intersect with NW Brugger Road rather

than NW Kaiser Road, and recommends the proposed parallel regional trail to cross NW Kaiser

Road via an at-grade or under crossing.

Strategy 6.1.5 Develop performance measures that quantify the accessibility of essential

destinations and work to increase the accessibility of those destinations.


Strategy 6.1.6 Consider all abilities and travel options when planning, designing and

implementing transportation improvements.


Strategy 6.1.7 Provide adequate access for emergency service vehicles throughout the system.

Coordinate with emergency service providers on proposed transportation improvements and/or

design and placement of traffic calming devices. Consider emergency vehicle access during the

review of proposed private development actions as required by the Community Development

Code (CDC).

Response: The modifications of P-2 does not diminish access and mobility for emergency

service vehicles.

Strategy 6.1.8 Identify opportunities, and consider actions, to improve access in underserved

communities.


Objectives 7.1: Provide an interconnected transportation network that offers multi-modal travel choices

and minimizes out-of-direction travel for all modes.

Strategy 7.1.1 Require development to provide an interconnected local street system, as set

forth in the Community Development Code and/or Community Plans, including a pedestrian and

bicycle network. Require accessways in locations where street connections are undesirable or

impracticable.


operations and continues to meet applicable standards for horizon year 2035. The proposed P-2

and regional trail system modifications uphold east-west and north-south connectivity for all

modes as adopted in the North Bethany Community Plan.

Strategy 7.1.2 Require development to provide connections to established or planned

accessways, trails, easements and other non-motorized facilities.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 20


Response: The proposed modification maintains all established or planned facilities.

Strategy 7.1.3 Require development to address connectivity standards on lands designated on

the Local Street Connectivity Maps and/or within areas designated as Transit Oriented Districts.


Strategy 7.1.4 Prioritize projects that complete facility gaps and deficiencies as funding allows.


Strategy 7.1.5 Encourage the off-street trail networks to be integrated with on-street

pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Response: The proposed regional trail system modifications are integrated with the multi-

modal facilities planned along NW Kaiser Road and P-13, as previously planned through the

North Bethany Community Plan.

Objective 7.3: Consider new road alignments shown on the Functional Classification System Map and

Community Plans to be general and subject to modification depending on impacts and issues assessed

during the project development and development review process.

Strategy 7.3.1 Analyze and design new roads when development applications are received or

funds become available.


Strategy 7.3.2 Provide flexibility at the plan and project development level to respond to

location-specific considerations consistent with environmental, community and transportation

system objectives.


Strategy 7.3.3 Identify on-site new and/or additional Neighborhood Routes and Special Area

Local Streets through the development review process.


Strategy 7.3.4 Modify alignment of proposed roads as determined through project

development and/or the development review process and consistent with the Implementation

section of this plan.

Response: The proposed P-2 modification is undergoing the Washington County set process of

a legislative amendment.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 21


Objectives 8.1: Provide a network of “complete streets” that safely and comfortably accommodate road

users of all ages and abilities, including people walking, cycling, using mobility devices, taking transit

and driving.

Strategy 8.1.1 Prioritize public active transportation projects that are effective at improving

connectivity, filling gaps, expanding coverage of the active transportation network and

positively influencing walk/bike/transit mode shares.


Strategy 8.1.2 Early in the project development process, solicit and consider input from active

transportation advocates to help optimize the design of pedestrian, bicycle and access-to-transit

projects.


Strategy 8.1.3 On existing substandard streets where the construction of full street

improvements is not practicable within the foreseeable future, consider the construction of

interim pedestrian and bicycle facilities, as available public funding allows.


Strategy 8.1.4 Require new development to provide multi-modal complete street connections

as defined in the CDC.


Objective 8.2: Provide a pedestrian network that is safe, comfortable and convenient for people of all

ages and abilities.

Strategy 8.2.1 Prioritize pedestrian projects that are technically and financially feasible and

that also improve connectivity, fill gaps, and/or provide safe routes to schools, community

facilities, commercial areas, transit stops, or essential destinations.


Strategy 8.2.2 Prioritize pedestrian projects based on need; factors to consider may include:

safety, density (residential and employment), access to essential destinations and transit, and

environmental justice factors, among others.


Strategy 8.2.3 Inside the Urban Growth Boundary, require that sidewalks are constructed along

new or improved streets and along street frontages of new developments.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 22



Strategy 8.2.4 Facilitate safe, convenient and comfortable pedestrian facilities through the

provision of pedestrian scale amenities as deemed appropriate and in compliance with

applicable regulations.

Response: The proposed P-2 and regional trail system modifications separates conflicting

modes by reroute vehicular traffic to NW Brugger Road and providing a multi-use path for

pedestrians and bicyclists along the Bethany Creek corridor. Reducing conflicts between non-

motorized and motorized modes upholds a safe, multi-modal network.

Strategy 8.2.5 Consider enhanced pedestrian crossings treatments at intersections and at other

appropriate locations, including school zones, commercial areas, major transit stops, trail

crossings, Pedestrian Districts and warranted mid-block locations, using county-approved

crossing treatments.

Response: Engrossed ordinance No. 790, realigns P-2 to intersect with NW Brugger Road rather

than NW Kaiser Road, and recommends the proposed parallel regional trail to cross NW Kaiser

Road via an at-grade or under crossing. The proposed modifications supports the crossing

treatments across NW Kaiser Road as adopted through ordinance No. 790.

Strategy 8.2.6 In rural pedestrian activity areas, which includes recreational trail crossings,

consider improvements that enhance pedestrian safety.


Objective 8.3: Expand and improve the quality of bicycling infrastructure.

Strategy 8.3.1 Refer to the guidelines set forth in the Washington County Bicycle Facility Design

Toolkit when designing new or reconstructed urban and rural Principal Arterials (except for

freeways), Arterials and Collectors, and implement treatments as deemed appropriate.


Strategy 8.3.2 Develop a system of neighborhood bikeways on appropriate low volume streets

(as defined in the Neighborhood Bikeways Plan) to supplement the system of bicycle lanes and

paved shoulders on major streets.

Response: The proposed modifications does not impact the planned bikeways in the North

Bethany Community Plan area. In addition, as shown in Figure 5, eliminating the current P-2

alignment at NW Kaiser Road adds an additional 35 vehicles along NW Brugger Road, thereby

maintaining safe and convenient bike travel.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 23


Strategy 8.3.3 Designate a functional classification of bikeway travel, including a preferred

bikeway network, considering the following criteria for defining or modifying the classification:

A) Expected amount, type and characteristics of bicycle use. B) Population density of

surrounding community. C) Average daily vehicle traffic. D) Posted travel speed. E) Topography.

F) Road network density. G) Land use mix.


Strategy 8.3.4 Maintain and periodically revisit bicycle parking requirements in the CDC for

applicable new development.


Strategy 8.3.5 Coordinate the development of the bikeway system with other local and regional

agencies and integrate it with the delivery of other transportation services.


Strategy 8.3.6 Consider developing a rural road bicycle safety study that proposes solutions and

strategies to increase the safety of recreational and utilitarian cycling in the rural area.

Implement recommendations as appropriate.


Objective 8.4: Assist partners in developing and maintaining an off-street trail and accessway network

that serves both recreational and transportation functions.

Strategy 8.4.1 Require new development and redevelopment to provide adequate

neighborhood connectivity by constructing public accessways, both within the site and

connecting to adjacent land uses, in cases where street connections are not possible or not

desired.


Strategy 8.4.2 Ensure that new development and redevelopment does not preclude

implementation of the planned off-street trail network shown in the TSP.

Response: The proposed regional trail modifications uphold the intent of the North Bethany

Community Plan while allowing for surrounding development.

Strategy 8.4.3 Work with Metro, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District (THPRD), cities,

private developers and other entities to plan, map and improve countywide trail connectivity,

including filling gaps in existing regional trails and planning new trails in areas lacking in these

facilities.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 24


Response: The public involvement process of this legislative plan amendment has been

approved by Washington County planning staff and involved coordination with the CPO and the

neighborhood. In addition, THPRD has reviewed the proposed modifications and supports the

legislative amendment.

Strategy 8.4.4 Designate a functional classification of existing and planned trails consistent

with Metro and THPRD trail planning activities.


Strategy 8.4.5 For appropriate multi-use trails that are intended to serve a utilitarian function,

encourage trail design and management solutions that facilitate the safe and efficient

movement of trail users, including, but not limited to, the following: A) Using surface materials

that are durable, slip-resistant, watershed-friendly and resistant to ponding. B) Avoiding or

addressing flood-prone areas. C) Minimizing sharp curves and out-of-direction travel that

increase travel times and create blind spots. D) In higher-density areas, installing pedestrian-

scale trail lighting sensitive to surrounding land uses and wildlife habitat. E) Keeping trails

legally open during night hours. F) Regular maintenance, surface repairs and debris clearing by

the responsible jurisdiction.


Strategy 8.4.6 Explore trail provision and management solutions for areas of Washington

County that lack a recreation district, parks department, or other provider of trails.


Objective 9.4: Ensure consistency with state and federal guidelines, and coordinate planning activities,

as appropriate, with state and federal agencies.

Strategy 9.4.1 Work jointly with Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to identify and

resolve state/county issues.

Response: See response section below to the “Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)”

Strategy 9.4.2 Coordinate with ODOT and Department of Land Conservation and Development

and others to comply with the requirements of the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals, other

state requirements, and review all plan amendment requests for consistency with the applicable

provisions of the Transportation Planning Rule as set forth in OAR 660-12-060.

Response: See response section below to the “Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)”

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 25


Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)

The proposed modifications of P-2 and the regional trail system requires a Comprehensive Plan

amendment that addresses, among other policies, Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-12-0060, also

known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). The TPR sets forth the criteria for evaluating plan and

land use regulation amendments. Table 1 summarizes the criteria in Section 660-012-0060 and their

applicability to the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment.

Table 1: Summary of Criteria in OAR 660-012-0060

Section Criteria Applicable?

1 Describes how to determine if a proposed land use action results in a significant impact. Yes

2 Describes measures for complying with Criteria #1 where a significant impact is determined. No

3 Describes measures for complying with Criteria #1 and #2 without assuring that the allowed land

uses are consistent with the function, capacity and performance standards of the facility

No

4 Determinations under Criteria #1, #2, and #3 are coordinated with other local agencies. No

5 Indicates that the presence of a transportation facility shall not be the basis for an exception to

allow development on rural lands.

No

6 Indicates that local agencies should credit developments that provide a reduction in trips. No

7 Outlines requirements for a local street plan, access management plan, or future street plan. No

8 Defines a mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly neighborhood No

9 Indicates that there is not a significant affect if the proposed zoning is consistent with existing plans No

10 Defines a multi-modal mixed-use area (MMA) and the requirements that support it. No

11 Encourages establishment of traded-sector jobs No

As noted in Table 1, there are 11 criteria that apply to Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments. Of

these, only Criterion 1 is applicable to this proposed action. This criterion is provided below in italics

with our response shown in standard font.

1. If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use

regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned

transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as provided in

section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule.

A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it

would:

a. Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility

(exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);

b. Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or

c. Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based

on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the

adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected

to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment

includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 26


generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This

reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment.

i. Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional

classification of an existing or planned transportation facility;

ii. Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such

that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or

comprehensive plan; or

iii. Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is

otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP

or comprehensive plan.

Response: The Comprehensive Plan amendment proposal will not result in traffic levels that change or

degrade the performance of the existing or future transportation system as defined herein. Therefore,

this provision of the TPR can be met.

Attachment B


July 28, 2015 Page 27


CONCLUSIONS

This memorandum documents the recommended and modifications to P-2 and Regional Trail in the

vicinity of the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road intersection within the North Bethany Concept Plan

area. Based on this analysis, it is determined that the modifications to the roadway and regional trail

system will comply with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and the strategies identified in the

Washington County Transportation System Plan (TSP), meet the intent of the North Bethany Concept

Plan, improve operations and safety along and across NW Kaiser Road, and operate in accordance with

Washington County standards. A summary of the findings are provided below:

� The elimination of the easterly P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection will not significantly impact

operations along the NW Brugger Road and NW Kaiser Road.

� The current proposed access spacing between the NW Brugger Road/NW Kaiser Road and

P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection is approximately 200 feet, which does not meet the

Washington County access spacing standard of 600 feet for an arterial. As a result, the

planned P-2/NW Kaiser Road intersection would be likely restricted to right-in/right-out

movements only. Thus, the elimination of the P-2 alignment does not create significant out-

of-direction travel.

� The proposed consolidation of Regional Trail crossings along Bethany Creek maintains

north-south pedestrians/bicyclist connectivity, minimizes impacts to designated wetlands,

and improves safety along NW Springville Road by reducing the number of proposed mid-

block crossings.

We trust this memorandum provides the necessary documentation of the proposed roadway and

regional trail modifications to support an amendment to the adopted North Bethany Concept Plan. If

you have any additional questions or comments, please contact us at (503)228-5230

REFERENCES

1. Washington County. Street Atlas Map. http://www.wc-

roads.com/uploadedfiles/Wash_Co_Functional_Class.pdf. Accessed on March 23, 2015..

2. Washington County. Approval Process for New Pedestrian Crossings at Mid-Block Locations and

Uncontrolled Intersections.

http://www.co.washington.or.us/CAO/PoliciesRules/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid

=611404. Accessed on March 23, 2015.

Attachment B

Appendix A 2035 Travel Demand Model

Forecast Volumes for the North

Bethany Area

Attachment B

1461

1462

1463

14641465

14661467

14681469

1470

1473

1474

1475

1477

574

755755

574

129

172

90

4

67

9

368250

428

470

226

183

183

226

447

428556

629

730

302

679

904

74

8

74

4

457

664

17

0

12

8

437

449

32

90

179

226

362

218

190

229

212508 229

143

387

183183

387

185

226

12

9

17

2

319

180

226

18

3

90

3226

87

9

15

2

1

9

7

01

2

5

1

3 1

1

6

84

4

23

40

84

9

45

3

243

6

216

347

479

5

107

210

66158

131

25451

95

2010 PM1 total vehicles

Washington County Westside Focus Model 2010 PM 1-Hour

Steve L Kelley 2010 PM 2-hour totveh_22315.ver 24.03.2015

Attachment B

346 /1.0302 /1.0

446 /1.5

395 /1.5

582

/1.5

810

/ 1.5

59

9/1

.5

46

6/1

.5

370

/1.5

379

/ 1.5

491 /1.5

445 /1.5

36

8/1

.5

19

1/1

.5

253 /1.5187 /1.5

179 /1.5

77 /1.5

84/1.5

76/1.5

217 /1.0

190 /1.0132 /1.0

166 /1.0

73

133

127225

93

164

1526

190

332

91

194

82179

109188

5437785

134

16596

173

460

177

57

24467

2655

106

162

140

67

292424

967

67123

15016

2035 TSP [J2/Gamma + UGA buildout] PM1 total vehicles


Steve L Kelley 2035_TSP14-SMCRT_NoBe_P2test1.ver 25.03.2015

Attachment B

460 /1.0

178 /1.0

360 /1.0309 /1.0

506 /1.5

472 /1.5

588

/1.5

820

/ 1.5

67

4/1

.5

52

8/1

.5

445

/ 1.5

440

/ 1.5

568 /1.5

505 /1.5

460

/ 1.5

178

/1.5

404 /1.5219 /1.5

174 /1.5

73 /1.5

87/1.5

79/1.5

223 /1.0

204 /1.0

142 /1.0

169 /1.0

1.5

1.5

153

279 73

133

127225

94

163

1527

190

332

82178

83

241

137

2817

173

247

124

75

262126

113191

64378

146

194

18098

169

475

177

970

72133

15316

2035 TSP [J2/Gamma + UGA buildout-no Rd-A] PM1 total vehicles


Steve L Kelley 2035_TSP14-SMCRT_NoBe_P2test2_NoRdA.ver 25.03.2015

Attachment B

1460

1461

1462

1463

14641465

14661467

14681469

1470

1471 1472

1473

1474

1475

1476

1477

623 /2.5

300 /2.5300 /2.5

623 /2.5

11

47

/2.5

68

6/ 2

.5

1012

/ 2.5

1820

/2.5

1. 0

1. 0828 /2.5

330 /2.5

330 /2.5828 /2.5 409 /1.0

291 /1.0150 /1.5

326 /1.5

557

/1.5

262

/1.5

999

/1.5

674

/ 1.5

398 /1.5

196 /1.5

344 /1.0

177 /1.0

177

/ 1.0

344

/1.0

1045 /2.5

415 /2.5

1820

/2.5

1012

/2.5

85

7/ 2

.5

14

76

/ 2.5

415 /2.51233 /2.5

327

/ 1. 0

294

/1. 0

279 /1.0223 /1.0

415 /1.5

380 /1.5583

/1.5

804

/ 1.5

64

5/1

.5

516

/1.5

325 /2.5811 / 2.5

280 /1.5

204 /1.5

665 /1.5359 /1.5

359 /1.5

665 /1.5

39

0/1

.0

26

9/1

.0

273 /1.5

118 /1.5

476 /1.5

415 /1.5

344

/1.5

17

7/1

.5

264 /1.5201 /1.5

14 /1.5

19 /1.5

19/1.5

14/1.5

147 /1.0

178 /1.0

222 /1.5

99 /1.5

99 /1.5

222 /1.5

3

1

48

92

51

75

32

64

153

27973

133127

225

108

190190

332

206

385

42

60

509850

257

400

33

10130

18

149

166

47

25

0

62128 92

195

81178

133

167

59

147

164

191

131

194

184

307

2035 TSP [J2/Gamma + UGA buildout] PM1 total vehicles


Steve L Kelley 2035_TSP14-SMCRT_Z.ver 20.03.2015

Attachment B

1460

1461

1462

1463

14641465

14661467

14681469

1470

1471 1472

1473

1474

1475

1476

1477

698 /2.5

353 /2.5353 /2.5

698 /2.5

10

64

/2.5

68

9/2

.5

1064

/ 2.5

1807

/2.5

1. 0

1. 0834 /2.5

333 /2.5

333 /2.5834 /2.5 411 /1.0

290 /1.0150 /1.5

326 /1.5

1016

/ 1.5

684

/ 1.5

399 /1.5

196 /1.5

449 /1.0

180 /1.0

180

/1.0

449

/1.0

1052 /2.5

419 /2.5

1807

/2.5

1064

/2.5

86

3/ 2

.5

14

60

/2.5

431 /2.51209 /2.5

267

/ 1. 0

272

/1. 0

286 /1.0224 /1.0

593

/1.5

821

/1.5

73

2/ 1

.5

58

3/ 1

.5

328 /2.5817 /2.5

287 /1.5

213 /1.5

745 /1.5421 /1.5

421 /1.5

745 /1.5

30

3/1

.0

26

6/ 1

.0

64 /1.5

32 /1.5

552 /1.5

472 /1.5

449

/ 1.5

18

0/1

.5

404 /1.5219 /1.5

13 /1.5

20 /1.5

20/1.5

13/1.5

151 /1.0

178 /1.0

1.5

1.5

2

1

48

92

51

75

32

64

153

27973

133127

225

108

190190

332

206

385

47

67

504842

257

400

33

10130

18

150

165

47

25

2

62128 91

195

81178

133

162

59

153

164

191

131

196

184

307

2035 TSP [J2/Gamma + UGA buildout-no Rd-A] PM1 total vehicles


Steve L Kelley 2035_TSP14-SMCRT-noRdA.ver 20.03.2015

Attachment B

Appendix B Synchro level-of-service

worksheets

Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area1: NW Kaiser Rd & Road A 2035 with P2 and with Road A Connection

With Road A - RI/RO P-2/Kaiser Synchro 7 - Report

Kittelson & Associates, Inc Page 1

Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR

Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 20 40 70 20 20 20 145 200 65 40 275 50

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1718 1805 1758 1805 1831 1805 1856

Flt Permitted 0.73 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.59 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1386 1718 1089 1758 901 1831 1118 1856

Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95

Adj. Flow (vph) 21 42 74 21 21 21 153 211 68 42 289 53

RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 67 0 0 19 0 0 8 0 0 5 0

Lane Group Flow (vph) 21 49 0 21 23 0 153 271 0 42 337 0

Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA

Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6

Permitted Phases 4 8 2 6

Actuated Green, G (s) 10.1 7.9 10.1 7.9 62.2 54.8 53.8 50.4

Effective Green, g (s) 10.1 7.9 10.1 7.9 62.2 54.8 53.8 50.4

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.09 0.74 0.65 0.64 0.60

Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Lane Grp Cap (vph) 176 160 149 164 748 1190 741 1109

v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.03 c0.00 0.01 c0.02 0.15 0.00 c0.18

v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.03

v/c Ratio 0.12 0.31 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.23 0.06 0.30

Uniform Delay, d1 33.0 35.6 33.0 35.1 3.6 6.1 5.6 8.3

Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Incremental Delay, d2 0.3 1.1 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.7

Delay (s) 33.3 36.7 33.5 35.5 3.7 6.5 5.7 9.0

Level of Service C D C D A A A A

Approach Delay (s) 36.2 34.8 5.5 8.7

Approach LOS D C A A

Intersection Summary

HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service B

HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.29

Actuated Cycle Length (s) 84.3 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0

Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.3% ICU Level of Service A

Analysis Period (min) 15

c Critical Lane Group

Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area2: NW Kaiser Rd & P4 2035 with P2 and with Road A Connection




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 10 15 30 5 5 5 40 395 25 20 330 15

Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free

Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95

Hourly flow rate (vph) 11 16 32 5 5 5 42 416 26 21 347 16

Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)

Walking Speed (ft/s)

Percent Blockage

Right turn flare (veh)

Median type None None

Median storage veh)

Upstream signal (ft) 340

pX, platoon unblocked 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

vC, conflicting volume 918 924 355 950 918 429 363 442

vC1, stage 1 conf vol


vCu, unblocked vol 871 877 262 905 871 429 271 442

tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 96 94 96 97 98 99 97 98

cM capacity (veh/h) 237 253 722 210 255 630 1206 1129

Direction, Lane # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1

Volume Total 58 16 484 384

Volume Left 11 5 42 21

Volume Right 32 5 26 16

cSH 385 292 1206 1129

Volume to Capacity 0.15 0.05 0.03 0.02

Queue Length 95th (ft) 13 4 3 1

Control Delay (s) 16.0 18.0 1.1 0.6

Lane LOS C C A A

Approach Delay (s) 16.0 18.0 1.1 0.6

Approach LOS C C


Average Delay 2.1



Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 15 15 5 20 455 0 0 360 5


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)

Upstream signal (ft) 807 950






tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 100 100 94 94 99 98 100

cM capacity (veh/h) 238 269 670 257 268 627 1185 1083

Direction, Lane # WB 1 NB 1 SB 1

Volume Total 37 500 384

Volume Left 16 21 0

Volume Right 5 0 5

cSH 286 1185 1700

Volume to Capacity 0.13 0.02 0.23

Queue Length 95th (ft) 11 1 0

Control Delay (s) 19.4 0.5 0.0

Lane LOS C A

Approach Delay (s) 19.4 0.5 0.0

Approach LOS C


Average Delay 1.1



Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area4: 260 & P12 2035 with P2 and with Road A Connection




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 5 20 20 0 0 0 0 470 20 5 370 0


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 98 92 97 100 100 100 100 99

cM capacity (veh/h) 258 267 663 222 271 608 1180 1044

Direction, Lane # EB 1 NB 1 SB 1


Volume Left 5 0 5

Volume Right 21 21 0

cSH 361 1180 1044




Lane LOS C A


Approach LOS C


Average Delay 0.9



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area5: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Brugger Rd 2035 with P2 and with Road A Connection




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 10 65 70 65 55 10 135 470 40 10 355 25

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1751 1805 1855 1805 1878 1805 1881

Flt Permitted 0.71 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.44 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1353 1751 729 1855 785 1878 829 1881


Adj. Flow (vph) 11 68 74 68 58 11 142 495 42 11 374 26



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 192 232 231 338 625 1188 471 1038

v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.06 c0.02 0.03 c0.02 c0.28 0.00 0.21

v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 0.13 0.01

v/c Ratio 0.06 0.43 0.29 0.18 0.23 0.45 0.02 0.38

Uniform Delay, d1 35.0 37.6 29.1 32.6 6.0 8.9 9.2 12.0



Delay (s) 35.2 38.8 29.8 32.8 6.2 10.1 9.3 13.1

Level of Service D D C C A B A B

Approach Delay (s) 38.6 31.3 9.3 13.0

Approach LOS D C A B





Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.1% ICU Level of Service B



Attachment B




Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT

Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 5 640 30 0 490

Sign Control Stop Free Free

Grade 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95

Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 5 674 32 0 516

Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)


pX, platoon unblocked 0.78 0.71 0.71

vC, conflicting volume 1205 689 705



vCu, unblocked vol 727 360 382

tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 99 100

cM capacity (veh/h) 307 490 844



Volume Left 0 0 0

Volume Right 5 32 0

cSH 490 1700 1700




Lane LOS B


Approach LOS B


Average Delay 0.1



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area7: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Springville Rd 2035 with P2 and with Road A Connection




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 15 105 110 75 65 15 160 640 115 20 435 35

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1703 1736 1760 1736 1900 1615 1805 1879

Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.30 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1335 1703 672 1760 541 1900 1615 506 1879


Adj. Flow (vph) 16 111 116 79 68 16 168 674 121 21 458 37



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 4% 4% 2% 17% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Turn Type pm+pt NA pm+pt NA pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA


Permitted Phases 4 8 2 2 6

Actuated Green, G (s) 17.1 16.4 21.9 18.8 52.5 46.0 46.0 42.1 40.6

Effective Green, g (s) 17.1 16.4 21.9 18.8 52.5 46.0 46.0 42.1 40.6

Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.19 0.25 0.22 0.60 0.53 0.53 0.48 0.47

Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Lane Grp Cap (vph) 266 321 207 380 421 1004 853 267 876


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.08 0.21 0.04 0.04

v/c Ratio 0.06 0.57 0.38 0.20 0.40 0.67 0.08 0.08 0.56

Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 32.1 25.9 27.9 9.8 15.0 10.1 12.9 16.8

Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 2.3 1.2 0.3 0.6 3.6 0.2 0.1 2.6

Delay (s) 28.4 34.4 27.1 28.2 10.4 18.6 10.2 13.0 19.4

Level of Service C C C C B B B B B

Approach Delay (s) 34.0 27.6 16.1 19.1

Approach LOS C C B B


HCM 2000 Control Delay 20.2 HCM 2000 Level of Service C



Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.1% ICU Level of Service C



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area1: NW Kaiser Rd & Road A 2035 without Road A Connection and with P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 20 10 90 15 15 20 190 160 60 60 245 95

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1645 1805 1738 1805 1822 1805 1820

Flt Permitted 0.64 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.61 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1219 1645 1308 1738 903 1822 1168 1820


Adj. Flow (vph) 21 11 95 16 16 21 200 168 63 63 258 100



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 142 140 116 129 767 1203 822 1129

v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 c0.02 0.12 0.00 c0.19

v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 0.01 0.17 0.05

v/c Ratio 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.26 0.18 0.08 0.31

Uniform Delay, d1 34.2 35.8 35.7 36.6 3.2 5.5 4.6 7.5



Delay (s) 34.7 36.3 36.3 37.1 3.4 5.9 4.7 8.2

Level of Service C D D D A A A A

Approach Delay (s) 36.0 36.8 4.7 7.7

Approach LOS D D A A








Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area2: NW Kaiser Rd & P4 2035 without Road A Connection and with P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 10 5 40 5 5 5 55 395 25 25 300 25


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 95 98 94 97 98 99 95 98

cM capacity (veh/h) 228 244 740 204 244 630 1229 1129





cSH 465 283 1229 1129



Control Delay (s) 13.8 18.4 1.4 0.8

Lane LOS B C A A

Approach Delay (s) 13.8 18.4 1.4 0.8

Approach LOS B C


Average Delay 2.2



Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 0 0 5 25 470 0 0 330 15


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 99 98 100

cM capacity (veh/h) 252 268 693 256 264 616 1207 1066



Volume Left 0 26 0

Volume Right 5 0 16

cSH 616 1207 1700




Lane LOS B A


Approach LOS B


Average Delay 0.4



Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area4: 260 & P12 2035 without Road A Connection and with P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 5 20 25 0 0 0 0 490 20 5 325 0


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 98 92 96 100 100 100 100 99

cM capacity (veh/h) 272 278 705 230 282 592 1228 1022



Volume Left 5 0 5


cSH 397 1228 1022




Lane LOS C A


Approach LOS C


Average Delay 0.9



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area5: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Brugger Rd 2035 without Road A Connection and with P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 15 75 80 60 60 10 145 485 40 10 315 25

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1753 1805 1858 1805 1878 1805 1879

Flt Permitted 0.71 1.00 0.34 1.00 0.44 1.00 0.43 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1347 1753 654 1858 836 1878 809 1879


Adj. Flow (vph) 16 79 84 63 63 11 153 511 42 11 332 26



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 214 240 221 332 655 1174 450 1014


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 0.14 0.01

v/c Ratio 0.07 0.51 0.29 0.20 0.23 0.47 0.02 0.35

Uniform Delay, d1 33.7 37.3 28.5 32.6 6.1 9.2 9.7 12.2



Delay (s) 33.8 39.0 29.2 32.9 6.2 10.6 9.7 13.1

Level of Service C D C C A B A B

Approach Delay (s) 38.5 31.2 9.7 13.0









Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 5 665 30 0 455


Grade 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 99 100




Volume Left 0 0 0

Volume Right 5 32 0

cSH 470 1700 1700




Lane LOS B


Approach LOS B


Average Delay 0.1



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area7: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Springville Rd 2035 without Road A Connection and with P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 20 120 130 75 75 15 180 660 105 15 405 35

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1700 1736 1772 1736 1900 1615 1805 1877

Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.31 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1321 1700 581 1772 575 1900 1615 504 1877


Adj. Flow (vph) 21 126 137 79 79 16 189 695 111 16 426 37



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 4% 4% 2% 17% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 287 331 184 377 447 1020 867 244 858


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.09 0.22 0.04 0.03

v/c Ratio 0.07 0.65 0.43 0.23 0.42 0.68 0.07 0.07 0.54

Uniform Delay, d1 27.9 33.0 27.0 28.9 9.9 15.0 9.9 13.9 17.3



Delay (s) 28.0 37.6 28.6 29.2 10.5 18.7 10.0 14.0 19.7

Level of Service C D C C B B B B B

Approach Delay (s) 36.9 28.9 16.2 19.5

Approach LOS D C B B





Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service D



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area1: NW Kaiser Rd & Road A 2035 with Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 20 40 70 20 20 20 145 200 65 40 275 50

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.93 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.98

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1718 1805 1758 1805 1831 1805 1856

Flt Permitted 0.73 1.00 0.57 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.59 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1386 1718 1089 1758 901 1831 1118 1856


Adj. Flow (vph) 21 42 74 21 21 21 153 211 68 42 289 53



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 176 160 149 164 748 1190 741 1109

v/s Ratio Prot 0.00 c0.03 c0.00 0.01 c0.02 0.15 0.00 c0.18

v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.03

v/c Ratio 0.12 0.31 0.14 0.14 0.20 0.23 0.06 0.30

Uniform Delay, d1 33.0 35.6 33.0 35.1 3.6 6.1 5.6 8.3



Delay (s) 33.3 36.7 33.5 35.5 3.7 6.5 5.7 9.0

Level of Service C D C D A A A A

Approach Delay (s) 36.2 34.8 5.5 8.7

Approach LOS D C A A








Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area2: NW Kaiser Rd & P4 2035 with Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 10 15 30 5 5 5 40 395 25 20 330 15


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 96 94 96 97 98 99 97 98

cM capacity (veh/h) 237 253 722 210 255 630 1206 1129





cSH 385 292 1206 1129



Control Delay (s) 16.0 18.0 1.1 0.6

Lane LOS C C A A

Approach Delay (s) 16.0 18.0 1.1 0.6

Approach LOS C C


Average Delay 2.1



Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 15 15 5 20 455 0 0 360 5


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 100 100 94 94 99 98 100

cM capacity (veh/h) 238 269 670 257 268 627 1185 1083



Volume Left 16 21 0

Volume Right 5 0 5

cSH 286 1185 1700




Lane LOS C A


Approach LOS C


Average Delay 1.1



Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area4: 260 & P12 2035 with Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 5 20 20 0 0 0 0 470 20 5 370 0


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 98 92 97 100 100 100 100 99

cM capacity (veh/h) 259 266 663 222 271 609 1180 1044



Volume Left 5 0 5


cSH 361 1180 1044




Lane LOS C A


Approach LOS C


Average Delay 0.9



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area5: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Brugger Rd 2035 with Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 10 65 70 65 55 15 135 465 70 10 355 25

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1751 1805 1838 1805 1863 1805 1881

Flt Permitted 0.71 1.00 0.38 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.42 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1347 1751 727 1838 787 1863 792 1881


Adj. Flow (vph) 11 68 74 68 58 16 142 489 74 11 374 26



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 191 231 229 334 627 1183 453 1044


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 0.14 0.01

v/c Ratio 0.06 0.43 0.30 0.19 0.23 0.47 0.02 0.38

Uniform Delay, d1 35.4 38.0 29.5 33.0 6.0 9.0 9.2 11.9



Delay (s) 35.5 39.3 30.2 33.2 6.2 10.4 9.3 13.0

Level of Service D D C C A B A B

Approach Delay (s) 39.0 31.8 9.6 12.9









Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 0 670 0 0 490


Grade 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 100 100




Volume Left 0 0 0

Volume Right 0 0 0

cSH 1700 1700 1700




Lane LOS A


Approach LOS A


Average Delay 0.0



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area7: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Springville Rd 2035 with Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 15 105 110 75 65 15 160 640 115 20 435 35

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1703 1736 1760 1736 1900 1615 1805 1879

Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.30 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1335 1703 672 1760 541 1900 1615 506 1879


Adj. Flow (vph) 16 111 116 79 68 16 168 674 121 21 458 37



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 4% 4% 2% 17% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 266 321 207 380 421 1004 853 267 876


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.08 0.21 0.04 0.04

v/c Ratio 0.06 0.57 0.38 0.20 0.40 0.67 0.08 0.08 0.56

Uniform Delay, d1 28.3 32.1 25.9 27.9 9.8 15.0 10.1 12.9 16.8



Delay (s) 28.4 34.4 27.1 28.2 10.4 18.6 10.2 13.0 19.4

Level of Service C C C C B B B B B

Approach Delay (s) 34.0 27.6 16.1 19.1

Approach LOS C C B B





Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.1% ICU Level of Service C



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area1: NW Kaiser Rd & Road A 2035 without Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 20 10 90 15 15 20 190 160 60 60 245 95

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.87 1.00 0.91 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.96

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1645 1805 1738 1805 1822 1805 1820

Flt Permitted 0.64 1.00 0.69 1.00 0.48 1.00 0.61 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1219 1645 1308 1738 903 1822 1168 1820


Adj. Flow (vph) 21 11 95 16 16 21 200 168 63 63 258 100



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 142 140 116 129 767 1203 822 1129

v/s Ratio Prot c0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 c0.02 0.12 0.00 c0.19

v/s Ratio Perm c0.01 0.01 0.17 0.05

v/c Ratio 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.26 0.18 0.08 0.31

Uniform Delay, d1 34.2 35.8 35.7 36.6 3.2 5.5 4.6 7.5



Delay (s) 34.7 36.3 36.3 37.1 3.4 5.9 4.7 8.2

Level of Service C D D D A A A A

Approach Delay (s) 36.0 36.8 4.7 7.7

Approach LOS D D A A








Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area2: NW Kaiser Rd & P4 2035 without Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 10 5 40 5 5 5 55 395 25 25 300 25


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 95 98 94 97 98 99 95 98

cM capacity (veh/h) 228 244 740 204 244 630 1229 1129





cSH 465 283 1229 1129



Control Delay (s) 13.8 18.4 1.4 0.8

Lane LOS B C A A

Approach Delay (s) 13.8 18.4 1.4 0.8

Approach LOS B C


Average Delay 2.2



Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 0 0 5 25 470 0 0 330 15


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 99 98 100

cM capacity (veh/h) 252 268 693 256 264 615 1207 1066



Volume Left 0 26 0

Volume Right 5 0 16

cSH 615 1207 1700




Lane LOS B A


Approach LOS B


Average Delay 0.4



Attachment B

HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area4: 260 & P12 2035 without Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 5 20 25 0 0 0 0 490 20 5 325 0


Grade 0% 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2

p0 queue free % 98 92 96 100 100 100 100 99

cM capacity (veh/h) 271 278 705 230 282 592 1228 1022



Volume Left 5 0 5


cSH 397 1228 1022




Lane LOS C A


Approach LOS C


Average Delay 0.9



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area5: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Brugger Rd 2035 without Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 15 75 80 60 60 15 145 480 70 10 315 25

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1753 1805 1842 1805 1864 1805 1879

Flt Permitted 0.71 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.45 1.00 0.41 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1341 1753 680 1842 849 1864 777 1879


Adj. Flow (vph) 16 79 84 63 63 16 153 505 74 11 332 26



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 211 239 202 311 670 1192 446 1048


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.05 0.14 0.01

v/c Ratio 0.08 0.51 0.31 0.22 0.23 0.48 0.02 0.34

Uniform Delay, d1 34.5 38.2 30.5 34.1 5.7 8.9 9.2 11.5



Delay (s) 34.7 40.0 31.4 34.5 5.9 10.3 9.2 12.4

Level of Service C D C C A B A B

Approach Delay (s) 39.5 33.1 9.4 12.3









Attachment B





Lane Configurations

Volume (veh/h) 0 0 695 0 0 455


Grade 0% 0% 0%

Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95


Pedestrians

Lane Width (ft)


Percent Blockage



Median storage veh)







tC, single (s) 6.4 6.2 4.1

tC, 2 stage (s)

tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2

p0 queue free % 100 100 100




Volume Left 0 0 0

Volume Right 0 0 0

cSH 1700 1700 1700




Lane LOS A


Approach LOS A


Average Delay 0.0



Attachment B

HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis North Bethany Concept area7: NW Kaiser Rd & NW Springville Rd 2035 without Road A Connection and without P2




Lane Configurations

Volume (vph) 20 120 130 75 75 15 180 660 105 15 405 35

Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900

Total Lost time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Frt 1.00 0.92 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.99

Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00

Satd. Flow (prot) 1805 1700 1736 1772 1736 1900 1615 1805 1877

Flt Permitted 0.70 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.31 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00

Satd. Flow (perm) 1321 1700 581 1772 575 1900 1615 504 1877


Adj. Flow (vph) 21 126 137 79 79 16 189 695 111 16 426 37



Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 4% 4% 2% 17% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%







Clearance Time (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0


Lane Grp Cap (vph) 287 331 184 377 447 1020 867 244 858


v/s Ratio Perm 0.01 0.09 0.22 0.04 0.03

v/c Ratio 0.07 0.65 0.43 0.23 0.42 0.68 0.07 0.07 0.54

Uniform Delay, d1 27.9 33.0 27.0 28.9 9.9 15.0 9.9 13.9 17.3



Delay (s) 28.0 37.6 28.6 29.2 10.5 18.7 10.0 14.0 19.7

Level of Service C D C C B B B B B

Approach Delay (s) 36.9 28.9 16.2 19.5

Approach LOS D C B B





Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.2% ICU Level of Service D



Attachment B

Administration Office • 15707 SW Walker Road, Beaverton, OR 97006 • 503/645-6433 • www.thprd.org

Board of Directors

John Griffiths President

Bob Scott Secretary

Jerry Jones, Jr. Secretary Pro-Tem

Joseph Blowers Director

Larry Pelatt Director

General Manager

Doug Menke

June 17, 2015 Washington County Board of Commissioners Washington County Planning Commission c/o Andy Back Planning & Development Services Manager Washington County Department of Land Use & Transportation 155 North First Avenue, Suite 350-14 Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 RE: Clean Water Services’ Land Use Ordinance Request to Modify Primary Street P2 Dear Ms. Cherniak, On behalf of the Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District (THPRD) Board of Directors, please accept this letter as an indicator of support and commitment to the proposed modifications to a segment of Primary Street P2 between Primary Street P3 and NW Kaiser Road in the North Bethany Subarea. THPRD is specifically in favor of eliminating P2 and creating passive open space along the drainage corridor as shown on the preferred plan option. This project provides a great opportunity for ongoing collaboration with CWS and THPRD. Not only will both agencies benefit from this modification, the preferred option will provide the greatest public benefit by creating additional passive open space and allowing for meandering of the community trail. Removal of the roadway along with the modified trail alignment will eliminate pedestrian and vehicular conflicts and provide a safe, off-street route for those walking and biking. It is the intent of the park district to connect communities, provide places to gather and recreate, as well as maintain these spaces and amenities efficiently. THPRD is in favor of one centrally located trail crossing of Bethany Creek, as shown on the preferred plan option. A single crossing will reduce impacts and allow for a park and trail design which promotes community gathering. Additionally, removing a crossing lessens the costs related to engineering, permitting, construction, and on-going maintenance and repair of these bridges or boardwalks. To achieve this vision of a single bicycle and pedestrian-only crossing of Bethany Creek, the district supports a separate modification of a condition of approval requiring Polygon Northwest to construct a stream crossing toward the east near Eleanor Street. As Washington County’s designated park service provider for the Bethany area, we have a continuing interest in park and trail development specifically within the urbanizing North Bethany area. We believe active and passive recreation is vital to the health and well-being of local communities. The addition of passive open space along the drainage corridor and modified trail alignment, by way of

of 2

eliminating of P2, will be a valuable addition to the THPRD park and trail network and will greatly enhance the usage of the park. The pedestrian crossing and stream enhancements made to the drainage corridor by CWS will provide infrastructure, connectivity, environmental functionality as well as a safer, more aesthetically pleasing experience for users, all of which are consistent with THPRD’s future objectives for the North Bethany area. THPRD has worked closely with CWS on this project and we look forward to further collaboration on this and future projects. Sincerely, Doug Menke General Manager cc. Bill Gaffi, Clean Water Services Fred Gast, Polygon Northwest Company Wayne Hayson, Washington County

LAIDLAW RD

CANTON ST

W ENDY LN

ENER

GIA

ST

BRUG

GER

RD

BRUGGER RD

SPRINGVILLE RDSPRINGVILLE RD

SPRINGVILLE RD

DECATUR WAY

KAISER RD

KAIS

ERRD

KAISERRD

146T

H AV

E

GRAF ST

GRAF ST

ROSSETTA ST

VANCE DR

164T

HA V

E

RYEGRASS ST

APPLEGATE LNDEERFIELD DR

CHEMEKETA LN

VETTE R

D R

WATE

RFOR

DWAY

JOSS AVE

TWOPONDS DR

TRAKEHNER WAYBLACKTAIL DR

WIS

MER DR

ANDALUSIAN WAY

ALFALFA DR

FAWNLILY DR

HACKNEY DR

WEST UNION RD

TWINFLOWER DR

GERMANTOWN RD

GERMANTOWN RD

CRA DY LN185T

H AV

E18

5TH

AVE

185T

H AV

E18

5TH

AVE

183R

DA V

E

RONDOS DRREINDEER DR

WEN

MARI

E DR

170T

H AV

E

N IGHTSHADE DR

178T

H AV

E

D EE R

F IE L

DW

AY

LIANNA WAY

WEST

BROOK WAY

The information on this map was derived from several databases and care was taken in its creation. Washington County cannot accept any responsibility for errors, omissions, or positional accuracy. There are no warranties for this product. However, notification of any errors will be appreciated.

I0 890 1,780445

Feet

1 inch equals 900 feet

Bethany Community PlanChapter 2

NORTH BETHANY SUBAREA

Washington County - Department of Land Use & TransportationLong Range Planning Division

Parks, Trails and Pedestrian Connections

MAP

North Bethany Subarea

Path:

S:\P

LNG\

WPSH

ARE\C

ompre

hens

ive P

lan El

emen

ts\Co

mmun

ity P

lans\B

ethan

y\Map

s\CHA

PTER

2\Ch

apter

2_Pa

rks.m

xd 5

/29/20

13

M u l t n o m a h C o u n t y

East Community Park

WestCommunity

Park Park Blocks

k Connect to Local Street! ! ! ! Off-Street Trail

X X X AccesswayNecessary Pedestrian Connection(May be provided through anoff-street trail or a street)

Neighborhood Park Areas

Fixed Park

AngelaB

Typewritten Text

Attachment D

AngelaB

Typewritten Text

From: Mary Manseau [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 3:46 PM To: Robert Fraley; Theresa Cherniak Subject: Ordinance 805 Bob, Attached are my suggested edits to ASC 7. A few other random questions/comments: Southeast Neighborhood Design Elements

1. pg 8 of 12, 4a., The number of pedestrian crossing of Bethany Creek in the Southeast Neighborhood has been reduced from 3 to 2. Does it need to be clarified that road crossings with pedestrian facilities do not count toward this total? One is planned between Kaiser and P3. Where is the second planned?

2. page 9 of 12, 5e., The reference to the southern gateway is being removed from this section. Where is it being replaced? Or does it just need to live in the Central Neighborhood design elements?

3. page 9 of 12, proposed #7, in the 6th line, can "facing and east-west local street located adjacent to the linear park" be replaced with "local street"? I believe if it is understood that local street is the aforementioned east-west local street adjacent to the linear park.

Central Neighborhood Design Element

4. page 11 of 12, 4a., delete? Rosetta Street in the Central Neighborhood is and will remain only one block long. With removal of the segment between P9vand P3 it no longer serves an "important" function as an east-west connection and no longer connects p15 with Road A.

Mary

mailto:[email protected]

Department of Land Use & Transportation Planning and Development Services • Long Range Planning 155 N First Avenue, Suite 350, MS 14, Hillsboro, OR 97124-3072

phone: 503-846-3519 • fax: 503-846-4412 www.co.washington.or.us/lut • [email protected]

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19, 2015

PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 805

DELIBERATIONS

Planning Commission (PC) members present: A. Richard Vial, Ed Bartholemy, Tegan Enloe, Liles Garcia, Mary Manseau, Anthony Mills, Eric Urstadt, and Matt Wellner. PC member absent: Jeff Petrillo. Staff present: Andy Back, Theresa Cherniak, Stephen Shane, Robert Fraley, and Susan Aguilar, Long Range Planning; Jacquilyn Saito-Moore, County Counsel. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 805 – An Ordinance Amending the Comprehensive Framework Plan for the Urban Area, the Transportation System Plan, and the North Bethany Subarea Plan of the Bethany Community Plan relating to the North Bethany P2 Alignment and Location of Trails Summary Robert Fraley, Associate Planner, delivered a PowerPoint presentation on Ordinance No. 805 providing overview, background, key provisions, analysis, and trail consolidation information. Mr. Fraley also provided information regarding impacts relating to the transportation system, park, community design, and special frontage. On November 20, 2014, Clean Water Services (CWS) submitted a 2015 LRP Work Program request to modify the adopted alignment of a segment of Primary Street P2 adjacent to Bethany Creek to accommodate a wetland. The Board of Commissioners (Board) approved the 2015 LRP Work Program request and authorized filing of Ordinance No. 805. Ordinance No. 805 proposes to remove a segment of Primary Street P2 between NW Kaiser Road and Primary Street P3 in the North Bethany Subarea, and to modify the number and location of planned north-south pedestrian trail crossings in the vicinity. The request made by CWS minimizes impacts to adjacent wetlands, and a tributary of Bethany Creek, plus facilitates a planned stream restoration and wetland enhancement project. Staff Recommendations · Conduct the public hearing · Recommend approval of Ordinance No. 805 to the Board of Commissioners

Planning Commission Deliberations Ordinance No. 805

August 19, 2015 Page 2

Department of Land Use & Transportation Planning and Development Services • Long Range Planning 155 N First Avenue, Suite 350, MS 14, Hillsboro, OR 97124-3072

phone: 503-846-3519 • fax: 503-846-4412 www.co.washington.or.us/lut • [email protected]

Testimony/Documents · Letter in favor of ordinance submitted by Terry McGettigan · Letter in favor of ordinance submitted by Nora Curtis on behalf of CWS · Comments and questions submitted by Commissioner Manseau on August 19, 2015 Oral Testimony · Nora Curtis – CWS, 2550 Hillsboro Hwy, Hillsboro, OR – Testified in favor of ordinance.

CWS submitted the request to minimize impacts to wetlands and a tributary to Bethany Creek and to improve outcomes of the District’s proposed Bethany Creek Restoration Project.

· Terry McGettigan, 56500 Old Portland Rd, Warren, OR – Testified in favor of removing P2 to improve the quality of life in North Bethany.

PC Discussion · Questions and concerns regarding pedestrian crossings · Questions and comments regarding connections concerning P2 and Road A · Comment regarding the need for more time to review ordinances before filed · Commissioner Manseau will work with staff on minor issues that may or may not require

engrossment Action Commissioner Mills moved to recommend Ordinance No. 805 to the Board. Commissioner Garcia seconded. Vote: 7-1. Motion passes. Commissioner Vote Bartholemy Yes Enloe Yes Garcia Yes Manseau No Mills Yes Petrillo Absent Urstadt Yes Vial Yes Wellner Yes End of deliberations.