Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Active Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff propose prioritization and scoping approach to speed neighborhood bikeway builds
Summary
Corvallis staff outlined a two-part approach — prioritized scoring and upfront scoping — to accelerate neighborhood bikeway projects, using the Tyler Avenue project as an example and signaling potential budget requests in the next fiscal cycle.
City transportation staff told the Corvallis City Council in a work session that they plan to change how the city identifies, scopes and funds neighborhood bikeways so projects move from planning into construction more predictably.
Rory Rowan, the city’s transportation division manager, described a two-part approach: first, a prioritization exercise that uses objective criteria and public input to order projects; second, earlier scoping work to identify key elements (and costs) before final design. Rowan said the change is meant to reduce the number of projects that stall in design because a single missing element — such as a safe crossing at a busy street — emerges only after the corridor is partially designed.
The staff framed the proposal around the Tyler Avenue neighborhood bikeway, the city’s second bikeway in active design. Rowan said early planning assumed only limited pavement markings and minor traffic calming, but detailed design identified a significant barrier at Ninth Street that will require a larger intervention — possibly a partial signal or other crossing treatment — and therefore added cost and schedule implications.
Jeff (staff), speaking after Rowan, said the city would propose budget adjustments in the upcoming budget process to add funds both to finish Tyler Avenue and to pay for the scoping and prioritization work. He said the Tyler project is already in the CIP as an in-process project; additional crossing work would be reflected as an increase in that project’s cost in the budget. Prioritization and scoping efforts, by contrast, would appear first as budget requests for planning funds and then be added to the CIP after scope and cost are refined.
Council members asked about how the proposed exercise would relate to other safety efforts, specifically the Safe Streets/Roads for All task force. Rowan and staff said the two efforts would remain separate operationally but that the Safe Streets work — for example, identifying a high-injury network — could inform priorities. Council members also pressed for clarity on the prioritization criteria; staff said they intend to use measurable factors such as geographic distribution, safety indicators, readiness to implement, and funding feasibility while still incorporating public input.
Rowan told councilors that staff reviewed other cities’ approaches — including Portland and Eugene — and found the successful programs do a more deliberate scoping phase before detailed design. That early scoping, staff said, enables bundling similar work across corridors for engagement and design efficiencies and can reduce overall cost and timeline.
Staff sought council feedback at the work session; Jeff said staff wanted to know whether council supported the direction before the budget was finalized. No formal action or vote was taken at the meeting.
Ending: Staff said they will bring concrete prioritization criteria and cost estimates into the budget process and to the CIP review in coming months; Tyler Avenue’s additional crossing work would likely require a budget increase when construction is programmed.
