Public Workshop #3 July 25, 2017 Agenda Welcome Project - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Public Workshop #3

July 25, 2017

2

Agenda

• Welcome
• Project Overview

Background Meeting Purpose

• Alternatives for State Street

Street Design Land Use

• Next Steps

Project Overview

Create a Vibrant State Street

3

4

Study Area

Existing Street

5

• Two lanes in each direction
• Narrow sidewalks
• Limited pedestrian crossings
• No bike lanes along most of

corridor

Existing Land Use

6

• Vacant and underutilized

properties

• Many different zoning

designations

7

Analyze Existing & Future Conditions Identify Options Preferred Land Use and Street Design Alternatives

State Street Survey Late 2015- Early 2016 Public Workshop #1 March 8, 2016 Public Workshop #2 September 14, 2016

Evaluate Options

Today

How We Got Here

Evaluate Additional Street Design Options

8

Meeting Purpose

• Present preferred street design and land

use recommendations

• Review other street design alternatives

evaluated

• Seek input and comments

Street Design Alternatives

Create a Vibrant State Street

9

10

Three Street Design Alternatives

• 1. Improved Four-Lane

2. Road Diet 3. Hybrid – City Staff Recommendation

Common Elements

11

• Wider sidewalks along entire corridor
• Additional pedestrian crossings
• Changes to right-of-way

12TH St 25TH St 17TH St 13TH St

A B C 99 ft 86 ft 56 ft

Improved Four-Lane

12

A B C

• Similar to existing

roadway

• Four travel lanes

with no median

• No bike lanes on

State Street

Bike routes on parallel streets

A B C

Evaluation: Improved Four-Lane

 Least expensive to

implement

 Minimal neighborhood

cut-through traffic

 Easiest to implement  Least traffic calming  No dedicated bike lanes  Limited on-street parking  Least likely to stimulate

redevelopment

 Not consistent with NEN-

SESNA plan

13

 

Road Diet

14

• Two travel lanes
• Center turn lane
• Bike lanes on

State Street

• Public preference

A B C A B C

Evaluation: Road Diet

 Additional on-street

parking

 Continuous bike lane  Aligns with market

analysis

 Most likely to spur

redevelopment

 Most consistent with

NEN-SESNA plan

 Most traffic diverted to

parallel routes

 Greatest increase in

neighborhood cut- through traffic

 More expensive to

implement

15

 

A B C

Hybrid: Preferred

16

• Hybrid

West of 17th: Road Diet East of 17th: Improved Four Lane

• Dedicated bike lanes

between 13th and 17th streets

A B C

Road Diet Improved Four Lane

Evaluation: Hybrid



 Additional on-

street parking

 Aligns with market

analysis

 Aligns with NEN-

SESNA plan

 Easy to phase



 More expensive

to implement

 Potential safety

issues when bike lanes end

17

 Some traffic

diversion onto parallel routes and cut-through traffic

 Partial bike lanes



Preferred Land Use

Create a Vibrant State Street

18

19

Preferred Land Use

• Two new mixed-use zones
• MU-1 west of 17th
• MU-2 east of 17th

20

Mixed-Use 1 (MU-1)

• Multi-story mixed use

(retail space on ground floor)

• Commercial uses
• Taller buildings

(4-5 stories)

• Pedestrian-oriented

design standards

21

Mixed-Use 2 (MU-2)

• Mixed-use and

multifamily housing

• Commercial uses
• Shorter buildings

(3-4 stories)

• Pedestrian-oriented

design standards

Setbacks

• Buildings abutting

residential zones: 5-10 foot setback

• Larger setbacks for taller

buildings

22

23

MU-2 Setback:

Where MU-2 abuts residential

Next Steps

24

Create a Vibrant State Street

25

Next Steps

August 2017: Finalize Alternatives Fall-Winter 2017: Draft and Present Final Plan 2018: Adopt code changes Continue funding discussions

Please visit the stations around the room and provide comments. http://www.cityofsalem.net/Pages/state-street- corridor-plan-to-revitalize-the-street.aspx

Thank you for coming!

Please leave your comment cards in the box.

27