Ordinance No. 20258 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ALTERNATg/ES ~S~O*:J~ED - ~EP factors leading to the Modified Project (Northern Alternative) being recommended as the preferred alternative with justification presented as to why other alternatives are deemed unreasonable. Eva uation Factors In the development of the WEP, there were an extensive number of akernatives and options considered and evaluated. The TPR requires a determination of reasonableness be identified and justified for affecting exception lands outside of the UGB. The factors identified in the T?R include operational feasibility, cost and economic dislocation. Many corridors, alternatives, and options were considered and rejected outright on a qualitative or comparative basis due to unfeasibility from an engineering standpoint and/or negative impacts to the natural environment. A summary of these alternatives is shown in Appendix C with a written description of design and operational features that make them unreasonable~ TranspoFmtion operational feasibility factors include application of Oregon's transportation plans~ policies, and standards (design, level of service, safety, etc.). These factors include safe engineering design, capacity to reasonably accommodate future travel demand, and constructab[lity. The WEP would be designed and constructed to comply with ODOT standards for an urban, statewide, limited access facility according to; Oregon Highway Plan (ODOT 1999), Metric Highway Design Manual (ODOT 1993), .4 Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (AASHTO 1994), Roadside Design Guide (AASHTO 1996), Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (ODOT 1996), and Supplemental Standard Specifications for Highway Construction (ODOT t 996). A public hearing process occurred prior to the adoption of the Oregon Highway Plan and the classification of facilities. Cost factors include costs for right of wa3, acquisition and relocation rights, sub-grade preparations, drainage featores, surfacing, structures, and roadside amenities~ Precise values are normally determined at the time of right of way acquisition and construction. Transportation financing in Oregon has not kept pace with inflation during the 1990s. Therefore, costs are critical due to the limited resources available. Safety, pavement conditions, and bridge sufficiency ratings are not meeting minimum service levels and are declining according to presentations made by ODOT to the Oregon Legislature of 1999. While costs alone cannot be the determining factor, relative savings represents potential system improvements to existing facilities elsewhere on the transportation network. Other relevant factors include reasonableness of alternatives to carry out project goals and objectives, plan consistency, and protection of natural resources. Comparison of Alternatives The focus of this section is to consider alternatives that affect non-exception lands, existing exception lands, and exception lands with least impacts that meet transportation operational requirements. This section reports facts about the three most promising alternatives, the southern having two options, from a transportation operations perspective. Figure 1 displays the four most promising alternatives listed below and as previously described in more detail as well as other alternatives described in Appendix C. Approved FEIS Alternative, the alignment of which lies south of the railroad tracks west of Danebo Avenue. This alternative does not provide flyover from northbound Highway 99 to westbound WEP. Alignment has received approved use of agricultural lands through goal exceptions adopted in 1986. EXHIBIT C,-2 - F~NO~NGS 14