1990-37616-Minutes for Meeting November 05,1990 Recorded 12/17/1990r
so-3'76 10 5 1560"' PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES
BEND PARKWAY 17 ~
2
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'`
November 5, 1990
Chair Throop called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Board
members in attendance were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Lois
Bristow Prante. Also present were Rick Isham, County Legal Counsel
and George Read, Planning Directors.
Chair Throop announced that the purpose of the public hearing was
to take testimony on the proposed amendments to the Bend Area
General Plan to include the Bend Parkway corridor and connecting
arterial and collector streets in the Comprehensive Plan map and
in the text of the plan, to consider amending the public facilities
element of the Comprehensive Plan, and include the Bend Parkway
Corridor in the public facilities element and to consider an access
management policy for the parkway. In order to amend the
Comprehensive Plan, the City and County had to address the
statewide planning goals 1-14. The corridor was a general line on
the plan map, and the details of the design were not addressed in
the amendments. The design details would be addressed at the
environmental impact assessment hearing held by the Oregon
Department of Transportation in the Spring of 1991.
George Read reported that the process had taken approximately two
years and the Board had been given a packet of information on the
entire process. The Bend Urban Area Planning Commission made a
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioner to place the
Parkway on the comprehensive plan map. The purpose of this public
hearing was limited to the proposed amendments to the comprehensive
plan (the Bend General Plan) to include the Bend Parkway Corridor
and connecting arterial and collector streets in the Comprehensive
Plan, to change the comprehensive plan map, and to consider
amending the public facilities element in the text of the plan to
include the Parkway corridor and to consider an access management
policy for the Parkway. The State could not proceed with the
environmental impact assessment without the amendments in the plan.
He said the findings and a summary would be prepared after the
public hearing based upon direction by the Board. The findings
would not include information that would come later from the
State's environmental impact statement. After the plan was amended
and the Parkway was placed on the map, there would be a number of
other steps in the process, i.e. visual management, signage, noise
control, historic sites, which would be addressed in the future.
Bob Bryant, Project Management, Department of Transportation, gave
an outline of the project. He walked through the project following
a map on the wall. At the north end, the Parkway would pul .away
PAGE 1 MINUTES: 11-5-90
rL NA
105 . 1561
from the existing highway just south of Mountain View Mall and
north of the existing Sisters interchange. Then it would swing
east against the railroad tracks with an interchange at Empire Road
and continue to parallel the railroad tracks behind the Bend River
Mall. A connection would be made at River Mall Avenue and then
over an extension of Butler Market Road to the connect with the
road by the Hampton Inn. A bridge would go over the existing
highway south of where Division Street splits from Highway 97. The
Parkway would then parallel second street, a block or so east of
the existing Division Street, then to the west and over the
existing Division Street, and then cross Revere a block west of the
existing intersection. Revere would be a full connection and a
primary access point for the downtown area and 3rd Street. Another
bridge would separate the Parkway from Olney Street, but there
would be no connection. It would continue along the existing
Division Street from the Italian Cottage on with a limited access
connection on Greenwood. There would be a short section of
realignment between Casey's Place and the log sort yard at DAW's
mill where there would be a traffic circle for access to Colorado
and the mill. The Parkway would then continue on the existing
Division Street through Wilson Street where there would be a signal
light. Proceeding south from there, most cross streets would be
closed off or dead ended because of the project. The Parkway would
pull away from the existing Division Street at Cleveland where
Division would dead end. Reed Market Road would be extended to
Blakley and there would be a signal at this location. The Parkway
would cross to the west side of the Hayes Avenue Apartments, the
canal and just to the west of Fred Meyer. It would cross Reed Lane
where there would be limited access. There would be a signal at
Powers Road and limited access at Badger Road. There would be a
signal at Pinebrook Boulevard, and then it would run behind the
Wagners Store with a light at the south end where Highway 97 would
be connected with the Parkway which would be just north of Village
Way.
Mr. Bryant said that the section of the Parkway which didn't
already exist on the comprehensive plan was the south end where the
Parkway moved away from the existing Division Street. George Read
said the area where the Parkway would move west of the Bend River
Mall would also be a change on the Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Throop asked where the "Welcome to Bend" sign would
be on the north end. Mr. Bryant said it would be where the
existing Division Street connected with Highway 97 at the north
end.
Mr. Bryant said they were introducing the new concept of a two
phase signal with this project. Over the design life of the
project, some of the signals would reach their capacity. In order
to extend the life of the signals, they decided to use a two phased
signal which would only allow traffic through the signal in the two
through directions with no left turns. So there would be "jug
handles" which would provide a means for making those "out-of-
PAGE 2 MINUTES: 11-5-90
105 1562
direction" moves which would normally be done through a left turn.
For example, if you were going south bound and wanted to turn east
on Reed Market, now you would wait for the left turn phase of the
signal, but with the new signal and the "jug handles," you would
turn right off the Parkway, come down across the "jug handle" to
Reed Market, and then turn left on Reed Market and then go through
the signal in the through direction. He said there would be no
direct access to Fred Meyer from the Parkway. The two phased
signal would extend the life of the Parkway since it would handle
a lot higher volume of cars without left turn signals. Their
analysis was that these two-phased signals would be adequate
through the design life of the project which was 2015. He said
there would be five stoplights on the Parkway. The State's formal
public hearing would be held in mid-summer of 1991 and the EIS
documents would be available in the spring of 1991. Right-of-way
acquisition would begin in 1992 with construction in 1994.
Chair Throop opened the public hearing. There being no one who
wished to testify, the public hearing was closed.
Chair Throop announced that the Board's decision would be made at
their meeting on November 26, 1990, at 10 a.m.
DESCHUTES COUNTY OARD OF COMMISSIONERS
2~
Lois B istow Prante, Commissioner
To Ur( o , Chair
Maudlin, Commissioner
BOCC:alb
PAGE 3 MINUTES: 11-5-90