II.  TRANSPORTATION

This section of the plan is designed to provide a sound set of goals, policies, and proposals relating to transportation issues and to be used in conjunction with the Metropolitan Area General Plan, Eugene-Springfield Area T-2000 Transportation Plan and Community Goals and Policies in making decisions.

1. Assumptions

   The Valley has been rightly described as a large cul-de-sac, a corner of the city sheltered by natural boundaries that give it an identifiable physical character. One of the best ways of preserving this identity is by establishing an attitude toward the automobile that is most beneficial for the Valley. Street patterns, traffic control, the relationship between the pedestrian and the automobile, and the relationship between the automobile and public transportation should be designed with the special interests of the Valley and its residents foremost in mind.

2. Neighborhood Goals

   1. To allow no connector street linking major roads at either end of the Valley to run through the Valley. The objection is based on the additional noise generated from such roads, aggravating the documented high noise levels already created by Interstate 5 freeway. A convenient interchange already links 30th Avenue to the freewal near Lane Community College. Two minutes of traveling time saved would not offset the enviromental damage done along the full length of the Valley.

   2. To have streets designed only as access to houses or facilities used by the neighborhood, such as schools and parks. Curved streets are desirable because they tend to discourage speeding automobiles. High speed traffic should be slowed down on all streets !in the neighborhood.

   3. To install a network of paths to connect park facilities around and in the neighborhood as a medium of intimate social exchange and to provide welcome pedestrian activity free from the intimidation of the automobile. The pathways made of gravel, wood chips, and asphalt; need not parallel the streets, but in fact should replace the traditional unimaginative concrete-by-the-street sidewalk. Separation between the vehicle and the pedestrian should be encouraged.

   4. To require all buildings to have adequate off-street. parking according to the occupancy of the building.

   5. To maintain and improve mass transit as the Laurel Hill Valley's highest urban services priority. A public bus service should be re-established to provide transportation for residents without automobiles and to reduce the use of and dependence on the automobile in the neighborhood. Bus service to Hendricks Park, Floral Hill Drive, and the East Laurel Hill commercial node and future East Laurel Hill residential areas is essential.

   6. To design a systematic transportation and traffic plan for the Valley as soon as practical.

3. Policies

   1. No arterial or limited access road will be allowed within the boundaries of the Valley which would connect the Glenwood interchange on Interstate 5 to 30th Avenue or Spring Boulevard (see goal #1).

   2. No arterial or limited access road will be allowed within the Valley except as necessary to serve Valley residents, as it would physically divide and.thus destroy the neighborhood.

   3. Street design will reflect the functions of the streets in accordance with their designation as "collector" or "local," and a mandatory street design standard should be avoided. Traffic patterns and street standards shall provide for such uses as public or school bus routes and emergency and service vehicles.

   4. All future construction in the Valley or East Laurel Hill shall include adequate off-street parking to accomodate not only permanent residents but a reasonable number of visitors. Although on-street parking should be discouraged, in some areas pull-out facilities for parking should be developed, particularly where congestion exists.

   5. Some east-west movements will be considered to avoid additional long north-south corridors west of Laurel Hill Drive.

   6. Traffic patterns generated in the southern part of the Valley will be extremely important to the remainder of the Valley and, therefore, careful attention will be paid to the movement of that traffic to areas outside the Valley.

4. Proposals

   1. The City should be encouraged to develop a method of payment for improvement of streets which will provide for participation by all neighborhood residents instead of only those property owners immediately adjacent to the street in question.

   2. Footpaths should be provided which will accomodate the movement of pedestrians and/or bicycles as they travel either within or through the Valley. These walkways should take advantage of existing rights-of-way and a variety of other easements where feasible and act to connect park facilities, provide a trail near the ridges of the hills surrounding the valleys and interconnect all sections of the Valley itself as well as areas outside the valley.

   3. Sidewalks adjacent and parallel to streets should be avoided where practi cabl e.

   4. No new road connections should be made linking the Laurel Hill Valley and East Laurel Hill and the Glenwood collector. The Glenwood collector access through East Laurel Hill and the Riverview/Augusta network in the Valley shall be considered separate systems.

   5. The exit from Riverview Street to the I-5 off-ramp should be one-way as it leaves the Valley.

   6. The I-5 off-ramp should be one lane from I-5 to the Riverview exit; with the second lane beginning at that point, on the left,, for traffic coming out of the Valley. A divider is suggested to emphasize the separation.

   7. A merging traffic warning or control light should be installed to reduce traffic speed on the off-ramp, before it reaches the Riverview Street exit from the Valley.

   8. Bicycle path connections will be increasingly important and connections should be made linking Floral Hill Drive, Hendricks Park, the Glenwood collector, and others.