The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEast Pine Street Corridor Refinement Plan (2012)City of Central Point Tech Memo 6 July 2012 East Pine Street Corridor Refinement Plan Streetscape Design Alternatives This page intentionally left blank. T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Concept Plan Diagram ...................................................................................................................... 5 Alternative A - Recommended Design Elements ........................................................................ 6 Alternative A - Pine Street Blocks 1st-6th ....................................................................................7 Alternative A - Before and After Illustrations .............................................................................. 8 Alternative A - Axonometric .........................................................................................................10 Pine Street Blocks 6th-10th Sidewalk Improvements ..............................................................11 Alternative B - Recommended Design Elements .......................................................................12 Alternative B - Pine Street Blocks 1st-6th ..................................................................................13 Alternative B - Before and After Illustrations ............................................................................14 Alternative B - Axonometric ..........................................................................................................16 Enhanced Bus Bulb-out on 6th and Pine Street .........................................................................17 Alternative C - Recommended Design Elements ......................................................................18 Alternative C - Pine Street Blocks 1st-6th..................................................................................19 Alternative C - Before and After Illustrations ............................................................................20 Alternative C - Axonometric .........................................................................................................22 Alternative C - Transition from 3 to 4 Lanes ............................................................................23 2nd Street Roadway and Trafﬁ c Operational Improvements .................................................24 Plaza .....................................................................................................................................................26 Economic Beneﬁ ts of a Good Main Street ..................................................................................27 Planning-Level Costs ........................................................................................................................29 I-5 Interchange 33 Area Management Plan .................................................................................32 This page intentionally left blank. 1East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan INTRODUCTION The East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan (Plan) is an opportunity to identify solutions for recognized problems with the current conﬁ guration and conditions of Pine Street, and to address aspiration for revitalization of the downtown area. The following challenges were key to initiating the project, and conﬁ rmed by technical analysis and community input. Vehicular Safety. Trafﬁ c often moves at a fast rate and motorists change lanes frequently to avoid vehicles making left-hand turns. Intersections along this corridor have the highest crash rates in the City. Pedestrian Safety. Pedestrian crossing on Pine Street can be difﬁ cult and dependent upon drivers observing pedestrians and stopping to allow them to cross. This is a critical safety issue for Crater High School and Central Point Elementary School students crossing the street. Bicycle Safety. There are limited bicycle facilities on Pine Street even though it is a designated bicycle route. Cyclists must ride in the ﬂ ow of automobile trafﬁ c resulting in greater risk of bicycle-vehicle collisions. Sidewalks and Storefront Activity. Existing sidewalks are narrow, which limits the ability to implement a streetscape design that will make the downtown area more attractive. DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION Community visioning and city policies are supportive of a revitalized downtown with Pine Street as an attractive setting for walking and shopping.At the policy level, the Central Point Downtown Revitalization Plan, 2000 and Central Point Forward: Fair City Vision 2020 set forth goals for downtown revitalization and recommend strategies for meeting those goals. The goals share a common vision of downtown as the heart of the community, with a diversity of business and economic activity, and Pine Street as a comfortable environment for pedestrians. WHAT IS A MAIN STREET? Traditionally, Main Street is the most important street in town. It is a good address for businesses, and creates an identity for the community. It tells residents and visitors alike something about the place, its people, and its history. When communities anywhere set forth a vision for downtown revitalization, they nearly always articulate a desire for a good Main Street. By design, a Main Street becomes more than a means to get to places - it becomes a place. It is actually a balance between two kinds of places. One is a place to walk around and look. It becomes a social space, as well as a business space. The other is a place to drive to and park. When a Main Street effectively strikes that balance, it will become the heart of the community and a center of commerce. WHAT DOES A MAIN STREET LOOK LIKE? A Main Street has short blocks, and is usually three to ﬁ ve blocks long. Buildings are close to the sidewalk and one another. There is a variety of businesses and, ideally, a few places to live. Trafﬁ c speeds are reduced and the street is easy to cross for people of all ages and abilities. The sidewalks are broad enough for two people to comfortably walk side by side. Attention has been given to storefronts, window displays, and the streetscape design (Figure 1). Pine Street today 2 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan INTRODUCTION MAIN STREET DESIGN The underlying goal of Main Street design is a street for everyone (Figure 1). This approach recognizes the need for safe and efﬁ cient operation of vehicles, while striving to balance transportation choices and improve mobility for everyone. The distinguishing characteristics of Main Street are in the sidewalk and amenity zones, the ease of pedestrian movement, and diversity of businesses and storefronts along the street. Vehicle operations and safety are also important. The roadway area between the sidewalks includes on-street parking, travel lanes, turn lanes, intersections, and sometimes medians and pedestrian refuges. SIDEWALK AND AMENITY ZONES These zones are typically designed as a single element, and are the primary aspects of an attractive pedestrian environment. Pedestrian comfort is strongly related to the width of the sidewalk, buffering from trafﬁ c provided by an amenity zone, and qualities of building fronts along the street. Together the sidewalk and amenity zones provide access to businesses and support community interaction in comfortable social spaces along the street. Sidewalk Zone. Sidewalks serve multiple functions. It is important they be designed to support the activities and features expected of Main Street. At a minimum, they need to provide continuous and unobstructed walking space of at least 5-feet in width to meet contemporary ADA requirements. However, for a downtown or a central business district, where there are greater expectations for storefront and pedestrian activities, a minimum width of 10 to 12-feet is preferred. Figure 1: Main Street Zones 3East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan INTRODUCTION Amenity Zone. The amenity zone should complement the sidewalk zone. A minimum width of 4-feet is needed to accommodate street furnishings without encroachment into the sidewalk zone. An amenity zone also provides space for passenger loading and unloading from on-street parking. If there is a bus stop, a 5-foot by 8-foot clear loading area must be provided to meet ADA standards. Street Furnishings. Street furnishings located in the amenity zone play an important role in creating a positive pedestrian environment and downtown identity. A comprehensive plan should be developed based on a fairly simple palette of benches, bike racks, kiosks, lighting, etc. Furnishings should never obstruct the minimum clear zone for the sidewalk. It is also best if the location of street trees and light poles are coordinated with the marked spaces for on-street parking to avoid conﬂ icts with opening of doors. Street Trees. Street trees are also an important element of an attractive streetscape. A growing body of research indicates a clear relationship between the presence of street trees and favorable perceptions of a downtown or central business district, as well as more favorable descriptions of the shopping experience. Trees need adequate room to thrive and a plan for maintenance. If an amenity zone has a width of less than 4-feet, trees should not be considered. PARKING ZONE On-street parking is critical to a successful downtown. It is as much a part of the place as walking. The parking zone also provides a buffer between pedestrian movement and social interactions of the sidewalk and moving vehicles in the roadway. If vehicle speeds are reliably less than 30 mph, the width of the parking zone can be as little as 7-feet. However, maintaining an 8-foot width is usually a safer design, especially if bicyclists are expected to share the adjacent travel lane. INTERSECTIONS Intersection design is complex, and is often completed on a case-by-case basis. A number of factors need to be considered such as: trafﬁ c speeds, pedestrian visibility and crossing distances, expectations regarding bicycle use, and expectations about vehicle operations including large vehicles. For pedestrians, how they are accommodated at intersections is as important as the sidewalk and amenity zone. Physical design measures that support comfortable pedestrian movement include shortening the crossing distance with curb bulb- outs, reducing the curb radii, enhanced pavement markings to delineated crosswalks, and increased intersection illumination. BICYCLE TRAVEL None of the streetscape alternatives include a dedicated bike lane on Pine Street. Instead, each alternative recommends the use of shared lanes (sharrows) with appropriate markings in the outside lane. Pavement markings let motorists know to expect cyclists on the street and remind cyclists not to ride too close to parked cars whose doors may unexpectedly open. While sharrow pavement markings are a nationally recognized form of trafﬁ c control for public streets and are described in the Oregon Driver Manual, their use may be new to Central Point. If early experience suggests motorists and bicyclists are not understanding the message being communicated by these symbols, it is recommended that an education campaign be employed. In addition to sharrows, bike routes are recommended on Oak and Manzanita Streets for cyclist traveling east-west through downtown. These are low-volume streets and could be designed for efﬁ cient bike travel by reassigning stop signs to the north-south streets. No removal of a travel lane or on-street parking would be required. 4 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan INTRODUCTION EAST PINE STREET ALTERNATIVES The streetscape design alternatives illustrated on the following pages explore options to make Pine Street a street for everyone; balancing the needs of trafﬁ c capacity and operations, and the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. Recommended design elements are also intended to satisfy the stated local aspirations for a more attractive streetscape through incorporation of amenities such as street trees, ornamental lighting, and street furniture. The alternatives also reﬂ ect challenges previously noted, and the technical analysis conﬁ rms it is operationally feasible to reconﬁ gure a portion of Pine Street from four lanes to three lanes. Careful attention has been given to the need for safe travel for all modes, and to accommodate emergency vehicles and oversized vehicles such as buses and freight. On-street parking is retained in each alternative and several measures are proposed to improve vehicle safety and operations. Alternative A - 1st Street through 6th Street. Retains the current four-lane conﬁ guration and travel lane widths, with sidewalks remaining at current widths. Alternative B - 1st Street through 6th Street. Retains a four-lane conﬁ guration but with a one- foot reduction in lane widths, which allows for the construction of slightly wider sidewalks. Alternative C - 1st Street through 6th Street. Assumes the reconﬁ guration of Pine Street as a three-lane roadway in this segment, with one travel lane in each direction and a continuous center turn lane. This would allow for a signiﬁ cant widening of the sidewalks. 7th Street through 10th Street Improvements. For each alternative, sidewalk improvements could occur in this segment by obtaining up to two-feet of additional right-of-way or easements from the front yard setbacks of existing properties. In Alternative C, the 8th Street to 7th Street block would be used as the transition from four to three lanes. Driving and parking Streets for Everyone Riding a bike Walking around and sitting down 5East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan CONCEPT PLAN DIAGRAM FRE E M A N R D 10th Street 9th Street La u r e l S t r e e t Al d e r S t r e e t 7th Street 6th Street 5th Street 4th Street 3rd Street 2nd Street Front Street Pi n e S t r e e t Bl o c k s 6 t h - 1 0 t h Im p r o v e m e n t s (P a g e 1 1 ) Al t e r n a t i v e A ( P a g e 6 ) Al t e r n a t i v e B ( P a g e 1 2 ) Al t e r n a t i v e C ( P a g e 1 8 ) Ma n z a n i t a S t r e e t Oa k S t r e e t Pi n e S t r e e t Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing at 6th St. Enhanced Crosswalks with Special Paving & New Bulb-outs at Intersections Bike Routes on Oak St. & Manzanita St. Mid-block Bulb-out (Alternative A only) Transition from 3 to 4 Lanes (Alternative C only) 2nd St. Improvements (Page 24) Enhanced Bus Bulb-out (Page 17) 8th Street 1st Street 6 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE A - RECOMMENDED DESIGN ELEMENTS Roadway and Intersections Four travel lanes would be maintained at their existing widths (12-feet), with no reconstruction of the existing curb. Intersection bulb-outs are recommended at 3rd Street, 5th Street and 6th Street to improve pedestrian visibility and crossing. Design of the bulb-outs should conform to technical analysis of Technical Memorandum 4 with respect to size and turning radii. Intersection bulb-outs are not recommended at 2nd and 4th Streets in order to accommodate truck and bus turning movements even though pedestrian crossing counts are relatively high at 2nd Street. Specially paved crosswalks should be added at each intersection, using durable concrete materials rather than stamped concrete or thermoplastic treatments. Sidewalk and Amenity Zones Widths of the sidewalk and amenity zones remains unchanged at approximately 8-feet total. This is a constrained condition that falls short of optimal Main Street design. An amenity zone of 3-feet will not support street trees. The 5-foot width the of sidewalk meets ADA requirements but does not allow two people to walk comfortably side-by-side. Sidewalks should be reconstructed to a consistent concrete ﬁ nish, using an attractive scoring pattern throughout. The number of signs located in the sidewalk should be reduced in order to reduce visual clutter. Existing sidewalks Continuous ornamental street lights Crosswalk pavement Street Trees and Furniture Small curb bulb-outs could be added mid-block to accommodate street trees and understory landscape planting. Given the constrained width of the sidewalks, these bulb-outs are the only opportunity to introduce trees as a streetscape element (see page 9). Street furniture such as bike racks, benches, and vending machines will be difﬁ cult to locate in the constrained amenity zone, with the possible exception of including a small bike rack at intersection bulb-outs. Street Lighting All existing street lights should be replaced by ornamental street lights to match those already in place between Front Street and 1st Street. Use two poles per corner at each intersection, and one pole on each side of the street at mid-block locations. Parking Zone One space per block face would be lost to construction of mid-block bulb-outs, and one space would be lost to the enhanced bus stop at 6th street, for a total loss of 11 parking spaces on Pine Street. Street corner curb bulb-outs at intersections will not reduce on-street parking. Bicycle Facilities Painted sharrow markings and bike racks located within the intersection bulb-outs are recommended enhancements to supplement marked bike routes on Oak and Manzanita Streets. 7East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE A - PINE STREET BLOCKS 1ST-6TH Right-of-way 80’ 64’8’ Sidewalk 8’ Sidewalk8’ Parking 8’ Parking 12’ Travel Lane 12’ Travel Lane 12’ Travel Lane 12’ Travel Lane Si d e w a l k Si d e w a l k Pa r k i n g Pa r k i n g Tr a v e l L a n e Tr a v e l L a n e Tr a v e l L a n e Tr a v e l L a n e Enhance Crosswalks with Special Paving Ornamental Lights New Bulb-outs at 3rd, 5th & 6th St. Intersections Aesthetic Sidewalk Surfacing Painted Sharrows Bike Rack Landscaping Opportunities at Street Corners 8 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE A - BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS Existing Intersection Conditions Alternative A - Intersection Improvements Improvements: • Enhance Crosswalks with Special Paving • New Bulb-outs at Selected Intersections • Ornamental Street Lights • Bike Racks in Bulb-outs • Sharrow Markings • New Sidewalk Surfacing • Clean up Visual Sign Clutter from Sidewalks 9East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE A - BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS Improvements: • Mid-block Bulb-out with Street and Landscaping • Ornamental Street Lights • Clean up Visual Sign Clutter from Sidewalks • Sharrow Markings • New Sidewalk Surfacing Existing Mid-block Conditions Alternative A - Mid-block Improvements Small bulb-outs should be constructed at mid- block, and landscaped with a street tree and low understory plantings. The bulb-out should be constructed with curbing that allows for a narrow channel between it and the sidewalk for stormwater ﬂ ow. One parking space is lost per bulb-out. 10 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Si d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e B Si d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e C ALTERNATIVE A - AXONOMETRIC 6’-Sidewalk Zone 4’-Amenity Zone 8’-Sidewalk Zone 5’-Amenity Zone S id e w a l k Z on e - Al te r n a t i v e B S id e w a l k Z on e - Al te r n a t i v e C 6’-Sidewalk ZononZonZonZnne 4’-Ameeenity ZonZZZZZonZonZZonZZoooeeeeeee 8’-Sidewalk ZonZonZonZonZZonZonZonZonZonZoZZonZonZZZeeeeeeeeeeeee 5’-Amenity ZonZonZoZoZZoZZonZonnZoneeeeee 5’-Sidewalk Zone 3’-Amenity ZoneSi d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e A This illustrates existing constrained conditions along most of Pine Street. Street trees, landscaping, and street furniture cannot be accommodated. The sidewalk lacks comfortable space for outdoor sitting or other storefront activities. Lo o k i n g E a s t a t 3 r d S t r e e t Existing sidewalk conditions 11East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan PINE STREET BLOCKS 6TH-10TH SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS New Sidewalk Surfacing Street Trees Added as Sidewalks are Widened Painted Sharrows Si d e w a l k Pa r k i n g Tr a v e l L a n e 2’-4’ Se t b a c k 8’ Sidewalk ParkingTravel Lane Existing Street Lighting to Remain Beyond 6th Street in Alternatives A and B, and beyond 8th Street in Alternative C, basic frontage improvements could be incrementally implemented as opportunities present themselves. Buildings along this section are setback, making it possible to widen sidewalks through additional right-of-way dedication. For these segments, no reduction in the width of roadway lanes, or in the number lanes is assumed in any alternative. Existing sidewalks could be widened to 10-feet to 12-feet in width by acquiring additional right-of-way or easements from property owners with front yard setbacks between buildings and the current sidewalks. With wider sidewalks, street trees could be introduced into the streetscape. Improvements could occur with property redevelopment or as a series of smaller capital projects carried out by the City.Sidewalks widened to 10 -12 feet 12 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE B - RECOMMENDED DESIGN ELEMENTS Roadway and Intersections Four travel lanes would be maintained but their widths reduced to 11-feet by constructing new curbs that are moved 2-feet into the existing roadway on each side. As with Alternative A, intersection bulb- outs are recommended at 3rd Street, 5th Street, and 6th Street to improve pedestrian visibility and crossing and should conform to the analysis of turning movements from Technical Memorandum 4. No mid-block bulb-outs are included with this alternative since street trees can be accommodated in the wider sidewalks. Intersection bulb-outs are not recommended at 2nd Street and 4th Street in order to accommodate truck and bus turning movements. Specially paved crosswalks should be added at each intersection, using durable concrete materials rather than stamped concrete or thermoplastic treatments. Sidewalk and Amenity Zones Sidewalk and amenity zone widths would be increased to 10-feet total as a result of reconstructing the curbs. This width provides the minimum conditions for Main Street design. The amenity zone has been increased to 4-feet, which will support street trees and other street furniture. The six-foot sidewalk width is the functional minimum for two people to comfortably walk side- by-side, but is still constrained for outdoor seating and sidewalk business displays. Sidewalks should be reconstructed to a consistent ﬁ nish and pavement detail throughout. Intersection Bulb-outs Trees in pavers Bike racks and landscaping Street Trees and Furniture Street trees could be located in small tree wells (approximately 4-feet by 8-feet) that could be planted or ﬁ nished with pervious concrete pavers set in sand to allow water inﬁ ltration to the zone. Root barriers are also recommended for each tree. Other furniture such as bike racks, benches, and vending machines may now be located in the amenity zone. Street Lighting All existing street lights should be replaced by ornamental street lights to match those already in place between Front Street and 1st Street. Use two poles per corner at each intersection and one pole on each side of the street at mid-block locations. Parking Zone One space would be lost to the enhanced bus stop at 6th Street. Street corner curb bulb-outs at intersection will not reduce on-street parking. Bicycle Facilities Painted sharrow markings and bike racks located within the intersection bulb-outs or the wider sidewalk amenity zone are recommended enhancements to supplement marked bike routes on Oak and Manzanita Streets. 13East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE B - PINE STREET BLOCKS 1ST-6TH Right-of-way 80’ 60’10’ Sidewalk 10’ Sidewalk8’ Parking 8’ Parking 11’ Travel Lane 11’ Travel Lane 11’ Travel Lane 11’ Travel Lane Enhance Crosswalks with Special Paving Ornamental Lights New Bulb-outs at 3rd, 5th & 6th St. Intersections Enhanced Landscaping in Sidewalk Furnishing Zone Aesthetic Sidewalk Surfacing Street Trees Painted Sharrows Reconstructed Curbs and 10 foot-wide Sidewalks Si d e w a l k Si d e w a l k Pa r k i n g Pa r k i n g Tr a v e l L a n e Tr a v e l L a n e Tr a v e l L a n e Tr a v e l L a n e Bike Rack 14 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE B - BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS Existing Intersection Conditions Alternative B - Intersection Improvements Improvements: • Enhance Crosswalks with Special Paving • New Bulb-outs at Selected Intersections • Ornamental Street Lights • Bike Racks at Bulb-outs • Sharrow Markings • New and Wider Sidewalks • Street Trees in Sidewalks 15East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE B - BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS Improvements: • Ornamental Street Lights • Sharrow Markings • New and Wider Sidewalks • Street Trees Existing Mid-block Conditions Alternative B - Mid-block Improvements 16 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Si d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e C S i d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e A ALTERNATIVE B - AXONOMETRIC 5’-Sidewalk Zone 3’-Amenity Zone 6’-Sidewalk Zone 4’-Amenity Zone 8’-Sidewalk Zone 5’-Amenity ZoneSid e w a l k Z on e - Al te r n a t i v e C 8’-Sidewalk ZonZonZonZonZZonZonZonZonZonZoZZonZonZZZeeeeeeeeeeeee 5’-Amenity ZonZonZoZoZZoZZonZonnZoneeeeee S id e w a l k Z on e - Al te r n a t i v e A 5’-Sidewalk ZonZZZZZZZZZe 3’-AmenitnnnnnnnnnyZonneeeee Si d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e B L o o k i n g E a s t a t 3 r d S t r e e t At this width, new sidewalks are fully comfortable for two people walking side-by-side, and passing people walking in the opposite direction. Limited storefront activities may be possible. The amenity zone is at the minimum width for street trees and furniture. Sidewalks at minimum Main Street widths 17East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ENHANCED BUS BULB-OUT ON 6TH AND PINE STREET 6th Street Bus Bulb-out (Approximately 30-feet long) Transit service is likely to play and increasingly important role in Central Point. The existing bus stop at 6th and Pine Streets should be improved by: a street corner extended bulb-out of approximately 30-feet in length, sufﬁ cient to load front and rears doors of a bus; a small shelter; and an ADA compliant landing with the bulb-out and at the front door loading area. Smaller bulb-outs should be constructed at the other three corners of the intersection with specially paved crosswalks. ADA Landing (Required) Shelter 18 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Roadway and Intersections The roadway would be reduced to the three lanes with a single travel lane in each direction and a continuous center lane between 1st and 7th Streets. The roadway transition from four lanes to three lanes would occur between 8th Street and 7th Street. New curbs would be constructed to deﬁ ne this narrower roadway cross-section. As with the other alternatives, intersection bulb-outs are recommended at 3rd Street, 5th Street, and 6th Street to improve pedestrian visibility and crossing, and should conform to the analysis of turning movements from Technical Memorandum 4. Specially paved crosswalks should be added at each intersection, using durable concrete materials rather than stamped concrete or thermoplastic treatments. Crossing distances for pedestrians would now be signiﬁ cantly shorter. Sidewalk and Amenity Zones Widths of the sidewalk and amenity zones can be increased to 13-feet total with construction of the new curbs. This is an optimal Main Street design. A wider amenity zone will support a greater variety of streetscape elements including Green Street planters if the City desires a demonstration project for innovative stormwater management. The sidewalk width allows multiple people to walk comfortably side-by-side, and will support outdoor seating and outside displays for businesses. Trees in planters Trees in grates Sidewalk seating ALTERNATIVE C - RECOMMENDED DESIGN ELEMENTS Street Trees and Furniture Furniture such as bike racks, benches, and vending machines could easily be located in the amenity zone, along with street trees, landscaping, and ornamental street lights. Street lights and street trees should be located at the beginning and end of on- street parking to avoid conﬂ icts. Street Lighting All existing street lights should be replaced by ornamental street lights to match those already in place. Use two poles per corner at each intersection, and for this alternative two mid-block poles on each side are recommended. Parking Zone One space would be lost to the enhanced bus stop at 6th Street. Street corner curb bulb-outs at intersections will not reduce on-street parking. Bicycle Facilities Painted sharrow markings and bike racks located within the intersection bulb-outs, or the wider sidewalk amenity zone, are recommended enhancements to supplement marked bike racks on Oak and Manzanita Streets. 19East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ALTERNATIVE C - PINE STREET BLOCKS 1ST-6TH Enhance Crosswalks with Special Paving Bike Rack Ornamental Lights New Bulb-outs at 3rd, 5th & 6th St. Intersections Enhanced Landscaping in Sidewalk Amenity Zone Aesthetic Sidewalk Surfacing Street Trees Potential for Outdoor Seating Painted Sharrows Reconstructed Curb and 13- Foot Sidewalks Si d e w a l k Si d e w a l k Pa r k i n g Pa r k i n g Tr a v e l L a n e Me d i a n Tr a v e l L a n e Right-of-way 80’ 54’13’ Sidewalk 13’ Sidewalk8’ Parking 8’ Parking 12’ Travel Lane 14’ Median 12’ Travel Lane 20 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Improvements: • Enhance Crosswalks with Special Paving • New Bulb-outs at Selected Intersections • Ornamental Street Lights • Bike Racks • Sharrow Markings • New and Wider Sidewalks • Street Trees • Enhanced Sidewalk Planting • Sidewalks with Cafe Tables and Benches • Green Street Stormwater Features (Optional) ALTERNATIVE C - BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS Existing Intersection Conditions with 4-Lanes Alternative C - Intersection Improvements with 3-Lane Street 21East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Improvements: • Ornamental Street Lights • Sharrow Markings • New and Wider Sidewalks • Street Trees • Enhanced Sidewalk Planting • Sidewalks with Cafe Tables and Benches • Green Street Stormwater Features (Optional) ALTERNATIVE C - BEFORE AND AFTER ILLUSTRATIONS Existing Mid-block Conditions with 4-Lanes Alternative C - Mid-block Improvements with 3-Lane Street 22 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Si d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e B Si d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e C S i d e w a l k Z o n e - A l t e r n a t i v e A ALTERNATIVE C - AXONOMETRIC 5’-Sidewalk Zone 3’-Amenity Zone 6’-Sidewalk Zone 4’-Amenity Zone 8’-Sidewalk Zone 5’-Amenity Zone S id e w a l k Z on e - Al te r n a t i v e B S id e w a l k Z on e - Al te r n a t i v e A 5’-Sidewalk Zone 3’-3333333333 Amenitittttttttty Zone 6’-Sidewalk ZononZonZonZnne 4’-Ameeenity ZonZZZZZonZonZZonZZoooeeeeeee Lo o k i n g E a s t a t 3 r d S t r e e t This sidewalk width supports the full range of streetscape features, pedestrian movement, and storefront activities typical of a vibrant Main Street. The sidewalk character, coupled with the narrower roadway, can reasonably be expected to result in slightly slower vehicle travel speeds through this part of downtown. Sidewalks at full Main Street widths 23East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan Right Turn Only Lane Merging Two Lanes into One ALTERNATIVE C - TRANSITION FROM 3 TO 4 LANES A full block length is required to make the transition from four vehicle travel lanes (four-lane conﬁ guration) to two vehicle travel lanes with a continuous third lane for turning and queuing for turns (three-lane conﬁ guration). The transition block can be handled with one of two options. 8th Street 7th Street Right Turn Only 4 Lane Cross-section 3 Lane Cross-section 8th Street 7th Street It could be designed with a right turn only lane at 7th Street, or by merging the two travel lanes into one. It is important the transition occurs over this block so drivers are fully accustomed to new driving conditions when they arrive at the next intersection. 24 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan 2ND STREET ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS Remove 3 parking spaces and add northbound right turn lane *Reduces delay *Shortens queues Additional improvements to vehicle operations can be achieved through removal of the existing trafﬁ c signal at 3rd Street, installation of a new signal at 2nd Street, and coordination of all signals on Pine Street. P i n e S t r e e t Pi n e S t r e e t 2nd Street2nd Street Alternatives A, B & C 25East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan 2ND STREET ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS Lengthen eastbound through and add lane at 2nd *Increases queue storage for eastbound trafﬁ c. *Reduces risk of queue “spillback.” Reconﬁ gure lanes to a 3-lane cross-section P i n e S t r e e t Pi n e S t r e e t P i n e S t r e e t Pi n e S t r e e t 2nd Street2nd Street 1st Street1st Street 1st Street1st Street 2nd Street2nd Street Alternatives A & B Alternative C 26 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan PLAZA The Second Street Plaza was originally conceived while developing the Central Point Downtown Revitalization Plan. At one community workshop there was a strong consensus that a small plaza along Pine Street, adjacent to Ray’s Food Place, would be a very desirable amenity. Ray’s deli is busy during the lunch hour so a place for outdoor dining and a focal gathering point seemed plausible. The Plaza was designed into the public right-of-way to minimize the loss of on-street parking, and to retain all of the grocery store’s parking. Landscaping, street furniture, art, and shade structures were all envisions for the site. 27East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF A GOOD MAIN STREET Streetscape enhancement projects often signify a public investment in the revitalization of downtown and support for a healthy business community. The direct relationship between urban design, such as streetscape enhancement projects, and economic activity is complex, and it can be difﬁ cult to isolate physical design changes as a stand-alone economic factor. However, when streetscape enhancement is part of larger strategy that couples design with promotion, organization and economic structuring the positive outcomes are far more apparent. The best of strategies will, of course, struggle during periods of economic downturn as have been felt over the past few years. Nevertheless, good community planning should be ready to take advantage of an upturn in ﬁ nancial and economic conditions. Understandably, questions about the economic return from Main Street investments and strategies are often raised. The citizens and business community of Central Point are no exception, and that question has been raised. The Plan will address that question more fully by providing an opportunity for a community dialogue based on understanding the comparable experiences of other communities, and setting realistic expectations for Central Point. However, a few things are worth noting as part of a discussion of these streetscape alternatives. Main Streets have always been about commerce. They should provide one of the best business addresses in town. A recent University of Washington research project used visual preferences and on-site surveys of shoppers to assess the inﬂ uence of attractive streetscapes, especially streetscapes with a strong element of trees, on four factors critical to business growth in downtowns and central business districts. The research included smaller communities with populations of 10,000 to 20,000. That study, along with multiple other studies, concluded that streetscape qualities do affect the favorable perception of those factors. Visual Quality. Images of business districts with tidy sidewalks, a cohesive streetscape design with trees, and attractive buildings consistently receive the highest preference ratings. Multiple studies have indicated a strong preference among consumers for a balance between more human activity and natural elements such as trees and architecture. This correlation of shopping preferences is highest where there is a cohesive core of historic or older commercial and mixed-use buildings representing the communities’ architectural heritage, as well as sufﬁ cient businesses, buildings, and density to be effective, compact, and pedestrian-friendly. This has been true even in districts with numerous historic buildings along a Main Street. Place Perceptions. Attractive streetscape create more favorable expectations about the shopping experience. Consumer surveys consistently demonstrate favorable expectations are associated with amenities such as street trees and benches, wide sidewalks, and a few pocket parks for socializing over a beverage from the local coffee shop. These expectations begin before consumers enter a shop and tends to inﬂ uence their assessment of the experience while inside the store, including the product value. Shopper Patronage. Several patronage variables increase when associated with attractive streetscapes. Shoppers are willing to come from a greater distance and to stay longer once there. They are also more likely to be return shoppers. From a Pine Street perspective, this can be part of increasing the customer base and attracting a certain amount of regional attention if the right mix of businesses are in place. Product Pricing. There are three general types of goods and services - convenience goods, shopping goods that are compared, and specialty goods. Research suggests the relative values of shopping and specialty goods increases within the environment of an attractive streetscape. Reinvestment and Employment. Data available from the Main Street programs of many states indicates a strong correlation between comprehensive Main Street revitalization efforts and private reinvestment in the downtown area. That investment takes form in new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, and storefront improvements. 28 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF A GOOD MAIN STREET This is typically accompanied by increased retail sales volumes, commercial property values, tax receipts, and the number of jobs downtown. Community Wide Beneﬁ ts. Research also suggests downtown revitalization can help create new economic activity across a larger part of the community. This often also correlates to new jobs and new housing opportunities. The Main Street Approach Many communities across the country have adopted a Main Street program of some kind. In Oregon, 76 communities participate in the Oregon Main Street Program. This approach is generally focused on four factors considered critical to success. Organization. Establish consensus and cooperation through partnerships among stakeholders in the downtown or central business district. If everyone is moving toward the same goal, a wide number of perspectives, reﬂ ecting a broad cross- section of the community, can be accommodated. Good organization divides the workload and clearly delineates public sector and private sector responsibilities. Promotion. Promotion can take many forms, but the goal should be to create a positive image for downtown. That positive image will help build consumer and investor conﬁ dence, communicate what is unique, and help sell the promise of the downtown Central Point of the future. Design. Design matters in making a Main Street all it can be. An enhancement project for Pine Street would certainly be a major piece of the needed design work, creating a pleasant environment for shopping and for working while conveying a positive message about what Central Point has to offer. Design attention should also be paid to storefronts, window displays, parking areas, and public spaces. Economic Restructuring. Retaining and supporting existing businesses is absolutely critical. Along with that, it is also important over time to consider ways to diversify and restructure the mix of businesses in downtown, including converting The shopping experience The display window unused or under-used properties. A broad and well-balanced mix of commerce helps boost the proﬁ tability for all and sharpens everyone’s merchandising skills. Goals must be based upon an understanding of today’s consumer, and on a good assessment of consumer changes to come. Urban Renewal. Downtowns play an important role in a community’s economic development strategy. They often account for as much as 30 percent of employment, and 40 percent of the tax base. The City of Central Point has implemented an Urban Renewal District to strengthen the economic and aesthetic vitality of the Downtown and East Pine Street Corridor Area. Streetscape improvements along Pine Streets is one of the identiﬁ ed projects for the district. 29East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan PLANNING-LEVEL COSTS Project descriptions and an opinion of probable costs have been provided for Alternatives A through C as illustrated on the preceding pages. The opinion of costs is intended to guide funding strategies to implement a preferred alternative for East Pine Street improvements, once a preference has been determined. The estimates of cost (see page 30) include probable construction costs of the key elements, a construction cost contingency, and estimates of mobilization and erosion control, construction survey, and temporary trafﬁ c control based on a typical percentage of construction costs. For Alternatives B and C, an allowance for utility adjustments within the right-of-way has been made, as well as for meeting stormwater treatment requirements likely to be triggered by the reconstruction of impervious surfaces (e.g. roadway and sidewalks). All costs are expressed as 2012 dollars. No costs have been included for on-going operation and maintenance costs, nor have soft costs for design and engineering been included. Alternative A - 1st Street through 6th Street Retains the Existing 4-Lane Cross-Section Although the existing sidewalks would be reconstructed throughout, this alternative requires no reconstruction of the existing curbs. It assumes there would be no signiﬁ cant re-pavement of the roadway other than the specially paved crosswalks. The mid-block bulb-outs would be constructed with separate curbs, allowing stormwater to ﬂ ow behind them through narrow gaps. The highest cost streetscape elements would be the ornamental street lighting and the construction of mid-block bulb- outs with street trees and landscaping. Estimated Construction Budget in 2012 Dollars $1.6M - $1.7M Alternative B - 1st Street through 6th Street Modiﬁ ed 4-Lane Cross-Section to Reduce Travel Lane Widths This alternative includes new sidewalks and curbs, along with new bulb-outs at three intersections. The curb line on each side of the street would be moved two-feet into the existing road surface. That would likely require partial to complete roadway reconstruction in the affected blocks, along with adjustments to the existing utilities and meeting stormwater treatment requirements. Allowances for those costs have been made. Ornamental street lighting and crosswalk costs would be roughly the same as Alternative A, but a more extensive street tree planting has been assumed given the wider sidewalks. Estimated Construction Budget in 2012 Dollars $2.1M - $2.2M Alternative C - 1st Street through 8th Street Reconﬁ guration from 4-Lane Cross-Section to a 3-Lane Cross-Section This alternative assumes new curbs, sidewalks and roadway work similar to Alternative B, but extending for an additional two blocks in order to allow for the four-lane to three-lane transition between 8th Street and 7th Street. The three-lane segment would begin at 7th Street. Cost assumptions for re-pavement and stormwater treatment are similar to Alternative B. Ornamental street lighting would include two mid-block ornamental street lights rather than a single mid-block light as in Alternatives A and B. Consequently, the lighting cost is higher. Estimated Construction Budget in 2012 Dollars $2.9M - $3.0M 30 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan PLANNING-LEVEL COSTS 7th Street through 10th Street Improvements Improvements in this segment consist of incrementally widening the existing sidewalk frontage through right-of-way acquisition or easements in the front yard setback of properties. These improvements could be completed on a property-by-property basis if redevelopment or building expansions occur, or as publicly-funded capital projects. For informational purposes a probable lineal foot cost for frontage improvements has been included. Estimated Construction Budget in 2012 Dollars $5,500 - $6,000 per 100 LF Potential Phasing The following approaches to phasing for the East Pine Street improvements could be considered. Alternatives A and B. The improvements between 1st Street and 6th Street could be constructed in two separate phases. A Phase I project could be 1st Street through 4th Street, which corresponds to the current downtown core, with the greatest density of business activity and continuous building fronts along the. Most participants in the walking tour conducted as part of this project said their feeling of being “downtown” was strongest in these blocks. Since corner bulb-outs are not recommended for the intersection of 4th Street, construction could be terminated at either the west or east side of the intersection without creating a dangerous misalignment of curbs. Phase II project would complete the improvements from 4th Street through the 6th Street intersection, making sure the curb bulb-outs were constructed on both sides of the intersection in order to facilitate safe vehicle and bike movements through the intersection. 6th Street to 10th Street Sidewalk Improvements. These improvements would likely be constructed as opportunities arise along individual property frontages. They would be phased as complete and continuous capital improvements project. Alternative C. This alternative does not lend itself to phasing since it involves the reconﬁ guration of the roadway between 1st Street and 7th Street from a 4-lane cross-section to a 3-lane cross-section. The transition block from 8th Street to 7th Street is also required at this time to maintain vehicle safety. Second Street Plaza. If Alternative A, with no reconstruction of existing curbs, is the preferred alternative, this plaza could be implemented at any time as a separate project. It would only require the removal of on-street parking spaces. The other alternatives require moving and reconstructing the existing curbs. The plaza project could not be completed prior to completion of the streetscape project. However, once the streetscape project was completed, with the new curbs in place, the plaza could be completed later as a separate project. Streetscape Enhancement Budgets The following estimates of construction costs are based on the conceptual illustrations of streetscape enhancements in Alternatives A through C. They do not include the probable incremental costs for sidewalk improvements only between 7th Street and 10th Street (see previous page). They do not include any costs associated with trafﬁ c signalization changes. All costs reﬂ ect 2012 dollars. 31East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan PLANNING-LEVEL COSTS East Pine Street Revised Streetscape Enhancement Budgets Alternative A 4-Lane with existing cross-section Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Demolition and Clearing 1 LS $30,585.60 $30,585.60 Mobilization and Erosion Control 1 LS $122,342.40 $122,342.40 Construction Survey 1 LS $20,390.40 $20,390.40 Temporary Traffic Control 1 LS $30,585.60 $30,585.60 Curb 'Bulb-Out' 12 EA $25,000.00 $300,000.00 Concrete Sidewalks, 8' width 16,800 SF $5.50 $92,400.00 Concrete Paver Crosswalks 9,840 SF $18.00 $177,120.00 Street Trees and Associated Landscape 12 EA $1,000.00 $12,000.00 Street Lights 50 EA $8,000.00 $400,000.00 Signing and Striping 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00 Drainage and Utility Adjustment Allowance 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Total: $1,223,424.00 Construction Contingency 30%: $367,027.20 Alt A Total:$1,590,451.20 Cost Per Block: $320,000.00 Alternative B 4-Lane with modified cross-section (narrower lanes) Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Demolition and Clearing 1 LS $33,089.40 $33,089.40 Mobilization and Erosion Control 1 LS $132,357.60 $132,357.60 Construction Survey 1 LS $22,059.60 $22,059.60 Temporary Traffic Control 1 LS $33,089.40 $33,089.40 Roadway Surface 1,400 LF $100.00 $140,000.00 Curb 'Bulb-Out' 12 EA $15,000.00 $180,000.00 Curb and Gutter 1,050 LF $20.00 $21,000.00 Concrete Sidewalks, 10' width 21,000 SF $5.50 $115,500.00 Concrete Paver Crosswalks 9,360 SF $18.00 $168,480.00 Street Trees and Associated Landscape 40 EA $1,000.00 $40,000.00 Street Lights 50 EA $8,000.00 $400,000.00 Signing and Striping 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00 Drainage and Utility Adjustment Allowance 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Total: $1,323,576.00 Construction Contingency 30%: $397,072.80 Alt B Total: $1,720,648.80 Cost Per Block: $340,000.00 Alternative C 3-Lane reconfiguration Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost Demolition and Clearing 1 LS $44,152.80 $44,152.80 Mobilization and Erosion Control 1 LS $176,611.20 $176,611.20 Construction Survey 1 LS $29,435.20 $29,435.20 Temporary Traffic Control 1 LS $44,152.80 $44,152.80 Roadway Surface 1,680 LF $100.00 $168,000.00 Curb "Bulb-Out' 12 EA $15,000.00 $180,000.00 Curb and Gutter 1,260 LF $20.00 $25,200.00 Concrete Sidewalks, 13' width 32,760 SF $5.50 $180,180.00 Concrete Paver Crosswalks 8,640 SF $18.00 $155,520.00 Street Trees and Associated Landscape 40 EA $1,000.00 $40,000.00 Stormwater Treatment Planters 5,443 SF $20.00 $108,860.00 Street Lights 72 EA $8,000.00 $576,000.00 Signing and Striping 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000.00 Drainage and Utility Adjustment Allowance 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Total: $1,766,112.00 Construction Contingency 30%: $529,833.60 Alt C Total: $2,295,945.60 32 East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan I-5 INTERCHANGE 33 AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN The ongoing I-5 Interchange 33 Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) project is considering multiple alternatives to preserve and enhance the long-range safety and efﬁ ciency of travel through the Pine Street interchange area. The alternatives analysis is focusing on four areas for consideration within the Interchange 33 inﬂ uence area: • Enhanced Network – This network incorporates most of the improvements identiﬁ ed in the East Pine Street Plan, which are not currently included in the ﬁ nancially-constrained list of projects in the 2009-2034 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). • Interchange Improvements – These concepts identify potential improvements that address deﬁ ciencies at the interchange ramps that would still remain with the Enhanced Network. Seven different interchange improvement alternatives are being considered, ranging from ramp modiﬁ cations to full interchange reconstruction. • West Side Improvements – These concepts focus on the 10th Street/Freeman Road intersection and identify potential improvements to address deﬁ ciencies remaining with the Enhanced Network. The concepts build on the downtown Pine Street 4-lane and 3-lane design option work that has been done to-date, and focus on the area between the southbound ramp terminal and the 10th Street/Freeman Road intersection. Four West Side Improvements alternatives are being considered, which mainly include increasing the capacity of the 10th Street/Freeman Road intersection by either adding turning lanes or restricting side street movements and rerouting trafﬁ c down Oak and Manzanita Streets to a new signal on Pine Street at 7th Street. • East Side Improvements – These concepts identify potential improvements east of the interchange ramp terminals that would still remain with the Enhanced Network. Three East Side Improvements alternatives are being considered that focus mainly on Hamrick and Table Rock Roads. While a preferred alternative has not yet been adopted, early feedback may be pointing to an alternative that includes the following elements: • Add second northbound to eastbound right-turn lane on northbound off-ramp. Could consider a management policy to focus on safety of northbound off-ramp at expense of East Pine Street operations, potentially until funding is available for physical improvements. • Add second westbound to southbound left-turn lane on East Pine Street and widen southbound on ramp to have two receiving lanes. Could be initial phase without bridge widening and long- term plan for longer lane with widened bridge. Could consider a management policy to focus on safety of southbound off-ramp at expense of East Pine Street operations, potentially until funding is available for physical improvements. • Add sidewalk on south side of East Pine Street between ramps by restriping travel lanes and replacing railing on south side to allow for one foot of additional width between rails across bridge. Could consider some roadway widening at either end of bridge to reduce lane narrowing off the structure. Should consider aesthetic aspects of railing replacement and fencing on both sides of bridge. • Add second westbound to southbound left-turn lane on East Pine Street at Freeman Road and widen Freeman Road to have two southbound receiving lanes through Oak Street. Restripe East Pine Street to eliminate one of the eastbound through lanes to minimize widening. Most alternatives being considered for the interchange area, including the anticipated preferred alternative, would not affect the design alternatives for Pine Street through the downtown. However, the West Side Improvements alternatives that include restricting turning movements at the intersection on Pine Street with Freeman Road/10th Street and rerouting trafﬁ c down Oak Street and Manzanita Street to a new signal at 7th Street could signiﬁ cantly impact the effectiveness of the design alternatives recommended for Pine Street. 33East Pine Street Corridor Reﬁ nement Plan I-5 INTERCHANGE 33 AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN One impact that should be carefully considered with any IAMP alternative that prohibits turning movements on Pine Street at 10th Street/ Freeman Road is the potential conﬂ ict with the recommendation to create safe and comfortable bike routes on Oak and Manzanita Streets from 1st Street to 8th Street in lieu of constructing bike lanes on Pine Street. The IAMP alternatives that reroute trafﬁ c down Oak and Manzanita Streets will increase trafﬁ c on the bike routes, increasing conﬂ icts and compromising the function of these streets as good biking alternatives to Pine Street. Motor vehicle operations along Pine Street could also be signiﬁ cantly altered if a new trafﬁ c signal were installed at 7th Street. While this alternative has not been modeled, a new signal at this location could change vehicle queuing patterns and overall travel times from one end of Pine Street to the other. Given the potential of some alternatives to signiﬁ cantly impact trafﬁ c operations and safety along Pine Street in the downtown area, further consideration should be given to the compatibility of alternatives between these two planning efforts prior to selecting preferred alternatives for Pine Street and the I-5 interchange area.