US101-Or6 AA Report (Full Report)

7/31/2019 US101-Or6 AA Report (Full Report)

1/202

ALTERNATIVES

ANALYSIS

REPORT

U.S. Highway 101

Oregon State Highway 6City of Tillamook, Oregon

Key Number 14313Federal Aid Number S009(354)

June 4, 2012

Alternatives Analysis Report andProposed Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Finding

Comment Period:

June 4 to July 6, 2012

Combined Public Hearing and Open House:June 20, 2012

Swiss Hall(4605 Brookfield Avenue, Tillamook)

4:30 to 7:30 p.m.


2/202

ALTERNATIVEFORMAT

AVAILABILITY:

In

compliance

with

the

Americans

with

DisabilitiesAct,alternativeformatsofthisdocumentwillbemadeavailable

uponrequest.Torequestthisdocumentinanalternativeformat,please

contactBillJohnstonat(503)[email protected].


3/202


4/202

This page left blank intentionally.


5/202

Table of Contents

Section Page

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE v ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Nomenclature ................................................................................................................................... ixAcronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ xiPreface ............................................................................................................................................... xv1 Purpose and Need for the Project .................................................................................. 1-1

1.1 Project Purpose and Need and Objectives ........................................................ 1-11.2 Project Setting ........................................................................................................ 1-4

2 Alternatives ........................................................................................................................ 2-12.1 Screening and Selection Process ......................................................................... 2-12.2 Alternatives and Options Previously Considered ........................................... 2-22.3 Description of Alternatives .................................................................................. 2-7

3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ...................................... 3-13.1 Transportation ....................................................................................................... 3-23.2 Land Use ................................................................................................................ 3-93.3 Right-of-Way and Utilities................................................................................. 3-133.4 Socioeconomics ................................................................................................... 3-193.5 Parks and Recreational Resources .................................................................... 3-273.6 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................. 3-353.7 Visual Resources ................................................................................................. 3-413.8 Water Resources .................................................................................................. 3-443.9 Biological Resources ........................................................................................... 3-493.10

Air Quality ........................................................................................................... 3-57

3.11 Noise ..................................................................................................................... 3-593.12 Hazardous Materials .......................................................................................... 3-643.13 Geological Resources .......................................................................................... 3-683.14 Cumulative Effects.............................................................................................. 3-693.15 Construction Activities and Effects .................................................................. 3-74

4 Evaluation of Alternatives .............................................................................................. 4-15 Public Involvement and Agency Coordination .......................................................... 5-1

5.1 Public Involvement Process ................................................................................ 5-15.2 Agency Coordination ........................................................................................... 5-45.3

Permits, Approvals, and Coordination Needed ............................................... 5-5

6 Appendices......................................................................................................................... 6-1


6/202

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE vi ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Appendices

A List of PreparersB Distribution ListC Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 DocumentationD Proposed Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Finding for Hoquarten Interpretive Trail

ParkE Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund ActF Supporting MaterialsG List of Supporting and Referenced Documents

Tables

2-1 Options that Formed Alternatives .................................................................................... 2-42-2 Summary of Rationale for Advancing or Dismissing Alternatives ............................. 2-53-1 Summary of Transportation Effects ................................................................................. 3-23-2 Primary and Secondary Roadway Classifications and Characteristics ....................... 3-43-3 Study Intersections ............................................................................................................. 3-53-4 Summary of Transportation Conditions in 2010 ............................................................ 3-53-5 Build Alternative 2036 PM Peak-Hour Travel Times .................................................... 3-83-6 Land Use Direct Effects Summary.................................................................................... 3-93-7 Build Alternative Direct Land Use Effects by City of Tillamook Zoning

Designations ...................................................................................................................... 3-103-8 Build Alternative Change in Land Use .......................................................................... 3-113-9 Summary of Full and Partial Tax Lot Acquisitions for New Right-of-Way ............. 3-133-10 Build Alternative Business Displacements ................................................................... 3-173-11 Summary of Socioeconomic Effects................................................................................ 3-203-12 Parks and Recreational Resources Direct Effects ......................................................... 3-283-13 Historic Properties Listed In, or Eligible for Listing in, the National Register of

Historic Places ................................................................................................................... 3-393-14 Water Resources Direct Effects Summary ..................................................................... 3-453-15 Summary of Direct Effects on Biological Resources .................................................... 3-503-16 Threatened, Endangered, Proposed, and Special-Status Aquatic Species that

May Occur within the Project Study Area .................................................................... 3-543-17 Noise Direct Effects Summary ........................................................................................ 3-603-18 Existing, 2036 No-Build Alternative, and 2036 Build Alternative Noise Levels ...... 3-633-19 Hazardous Materials Effects Summary ......................................................................... 3-643-20 Acquisition from Parcels with Features of Potential Environmental Concern ........ 3-663-21 Past and Present Actions.................................................................................................. 3-704-1 Measures for Evaluating the Alternatives ....................................................................... 4-24-2 Effectiveness of Alternatives Quantitative Measures ................................................. 4-34-3 Effectiveness of Alternatives Qualitative Measures ................................................... 4-45-1 Build Alternative Permits, Approvals, and Coordination Needed ............................. 5-6


7/202


TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE vii ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Figures

1-1 Project Study Area Existing Conditions and No-Build Alternative ......................... 1-2

2-1 No-Build Alternative and Proposed Build Alternative Cross-Sections atSelected Locations ............................................................................................................... 2-8

2-2 Build Alternative ................................................................................................................. 2-9

3-1 Transportation Study Area ................................................................................................ 3-33-2 Build Alternative Right-of-Way Acquisition and Business Unit Displacements .... 3-153-3 Socioeconomic Places of Interest .................................................................................... 3-213-4 Build Alternative On-Street Parking Spaces Removed ............................................... 3-233-5 Build Alternative Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park Acquisition............................. 3-313-6 Build Alternative Impact at Sue H. Elmore Park ......................................................... 3-333-7 Range of New Parkland at Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park .................................. 3-343-8 Area of Potential Effect Boundaries and NRHP-eligible and

NRHP-listed Properties ................................................................................................... 3-37

3-9 View from the Hoquarten Slough Bridge (Looking South) Existing Viewand View with the Build Alternative ............................................................................. 3-42

3-10 View Towards the Hoquarten Slough Bridge Existing View and View with theBuild Alternative ............................................................................................................... 3-43

3-11 Water Resources Near Project Study Area .................................................................... 3-463-12 Noise Receptor Locations ................................................................................................ 3-623-13 Parcels with Features of Potential Environmental Concern Fully or Partially

Acquired ............................................................................................................................. 3-67


8/202


TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE viii ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS



9/202

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE ix ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 NOMENCLATURE

Nomenclature

Existing conditions Represent baseline conditions for the alternatives analysis and arebased on conditions in 2012, except where noted.

No-Build Alternative Represents baseline conditions for the alternatives analysis and isbased on conditions in 2036 if only planned and programmed transportation projects areconstructed. See Section 2.3.1 of this Alternatives Analysis Report for additional details.

Build Alternative Represents the Oregon Department of Transportations proposedchanges to the transportation facilities relative to the No-Build Alternative. See Section 2.3.2for additional detail.

Project study area The project study area is generally defined as the area within which theBuild Alternative would change transportation facilities, as illustrated in Figure 1-1 in

Chapter 1. On US 101, the project study area extends from milepost 65.4 to 65.8. On OR 6,the project study area extends from milepost 0.0 to 0.2. Where applicable, the respectiveanalyses defined specific project study areas. (See the list of supporting documents inAppendix G.)


10/202

NOMENCLATURE

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE x ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 NOMENCLATURE



11/202

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xi ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Acronyms and Abbreviations

AA Report Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Analysis Report

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ADT average daily traffic

APE area of potential effect

BMP best management practice

CETAS Collaborative Environmental and Transportation Agreement forStreamlining

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO carbon monoxideCSZ Cascadia Subduction Zone

CWA Clean Water Act

dBA decibels on the A-weighted scale

DEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality

DPS Distinct Population Segmentdistinct population for the purposes ofconservation

DSL Department of State Lands

EFH essential fish habitat

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyESA Endangered Species Act

ESU Evolutionarily Significant Unitdistinct population for the purposes ofconservation

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map

HDM Highway Design Manual (ODOT, 2003)

House Bill 2001 Oregon Jobs and Transportation Act

inorg inorganic constituents (such as arsenic, barium, cadmium, cyanide,sulfur, chromium, lead, and mercury)

JTA Oregons Jobs and Transportation Act of 2009

Leq equivalent sound pressure levels

LGGP Local Government Grant Program

LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund


12/202

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xii ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act

MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act

mph miles per hour

MSATs Mobile Source Air Toxics

N/A not applicableNAAC noise abatement approach criteria

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAC noise abatement criteria

NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service

NO2 nitrogen dioxide

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NPS U.S. Department of the Interiors National Park Service

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

O3 Ozone

OAR Oregon Administrative Rule

ODA Oregon Department of Agriculture

ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

ODOT Oregon Department of Transportation

OHP Oregon Highway Plan (ODOT, 1999, amended in 2011)

OPRD Oregon Parks and Recreation Department

OR 6 Oregon State Highway 6

ORNHIC Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center

ORS Oregon Revised Statute

PA Programmatic Agreement

PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (by-product of incomplete combustionthat may be related to oil or fuel use)

Pb Lead

PCP pentachlorophenol, which is commonly used at sawmillsPM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter

PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter

PMT Project Management Team

SAAQS state ambient air quality standards

SAC Stakeholder Advisory Committee


13/202


TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xiii ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

SO2 sulfur dioxide

SPIS Safety Priority Index System

STA Special Transportation Area

TCTD Tillamook County Transportation DistrictTillamook TSP Tillamook Transportation System Plan (City of Tillamook, 2004)

TMDL total maximum daily load

TNM Traffic Noise Model

TPH total petroleum hydrocarbon (such as gasoline, diesel, heating oil, andmotor oil)

TPUD Tillamook Peoples Utility District

TTRP Tillamook Transportation Refinement Plan (ODOT et al., 2006)

Uniform Act Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies

Act of 1970, as amendedUS 101 U.S. Highway 101

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

U.S.C. United States Code

USCG U.S. Coast Guard

USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation

USPS U.S. Postal Service

UST underground storage tank

v/c volume-to-capacity ratio

VMT vehicle miles traveled

VOC volatile organic compounds (such as cleaning solvents, degreasers, paintthinners, or fuel components)


14/202


TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xiv ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS



15/202

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xv ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 PREFACE

Preface

The Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project Alternatives Analysis Report (AA Report) was prepared bythe Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to support the selection of a PreferredAlternative. The AA Report includes the following sections:

1. Purpose and Need for the Project describes the overall transportation, planning,economic development and environmental context that led ODOT and its local partnersto propose improvements to US 101 and OR 6 within downtown Tillamook. It concludeswith a general description of the project study area and the projects planning and policyframework.

2. Alternatives includes a description of the process, information and documentation usedto define and narrow the alternatives under consideration, concluding with a descriptionof the No-Build and Build Alternatives.

3. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences summarizes 13 categories ofdirect and indirect environmental effects, as well as cumulative and short-termconstruction effects.

4. Evaluation of Alternatives uses the projects criteria, objectives and measures to assessthe tradeoffs between the alternatives currently under consideration.

5. Public Involvement and Agency Coordination outlines the projects efforts to involvethe public and various agencies, as well listing permits, approvals or subsequent agencycoordination that would be needed if the project moves toward final design andconstruction.

Following is an outline of the steps involved in the state and local planning process, whichwill culminate in the selection of a Preferred Alternative, and the subsequent steps thatwould be taken if the Build Alternative is selected as the Preferred Alternative. Foradditional detail, see sections 1.2.2 (Planning and Policy Framework), 2.1 (Screening andSelection Process), 2.2 (Alternatives and Options Previously Considered), and Chapter 5(Public Involvement and Agency Coordination).

Tillamook Transportation Refinement Plan (TTRP). Between 2005 and 2006, ODOT,the City of Tillamook and Tillamook County worked to refine the TillamookTransportation System Plan to address a variety of transportation issues within downtownTillamook. The resulting TTRP includes several conceptual roadway improvements that

were recommended for further study.

US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study. Between 2009 and 2010, ODOT, the City of Tillamookand Tillamook County worked with the public to identify, define, evaluate and screen awide range of alternatives and options intended to improve the safety and mobility ofUS 101 and OR 6 within downtown Tillamook, including those recommended in theTTRP. This phase of the project concluded with the determination that the No-BuildAlternative and two build alternatives should be developed for further evaluation.


16/202

PREFACE

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xvi ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 PREFACE

Revised Build Alternative Designs. During 2011, ODOT worked to refine the design ofthe two build alternatives to improve their effectiveness and to avoid or minimize theiradverse effects. As a result of the design refinement, ODOT, in coordination with itslocal partners and project committees, determined that the two build alternatives weresubstantially similar to each other and that only one of those alternatives should be

advanced for further study (with the No-Build Alternative). Alternatives Analysis Report. This AA Report will provide ODOT, its local partners

and the public with the technical information needed to understand the tradeoffsbetween the Build and No-Build alternatives. In particular, this report will help ODOTdetermine if the mobility and safety improvements and other environmental benefitsprovided by the Build Alterative are warranted based on its cost and adverseenvironmental effects. ODOT also prepared and published various technicalmemoranda that provide more detailed information supporting the AA Report (seeAppendix G). The AA Report and supporting documentation are available for a 30-daycomment period, including a combined public hearing and open house.

Proposed Section 4(f)

de minimisImpact Finding. To comply with federal guidelinesconcerning proposed transportation projects that would use park and recreation land,

ODOT has worked with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to prepare aproposed Section 4(f) de minimis Impact Finding for the Hoquarten Interpretive TrailPark (see Appendix D and Section 3.5.4). The proposed Finding describes FHWAspreliminary determination that the Build Alternatives use of approximately 95 squarefeet of park land would not adversely affect the character or use of the park. ODOT andFHWA invite comment on that proposed Finding during the same 30-day commentperiod and public hearing.

Selection of a Preferred Alternative. After closure of the public comment period on theAA Report and the proposed Section 4(f) de minimis Impact Finding, the Project

Management Team and Stakeholders Advisory Committee will be provided with theopportunity to recommend a Preferred Alternative to ODOT (see Chapter 5 for moreinformation on the two committees). ODOT will consider those recommendations,public and agency comments received during the comment period and informationincluded in the AA Report in selecting a Preferred Alternative. If the Build Alternative isselected as the Preferred Alternative, then the following steps will be taken to completethe project.

Completion of Federal Requirements. ODOT and FHWA would work to complete theprocesses and documentation required to comply with National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) and related federal laws and guidelines (see Section 4.3). Based on the

environmental analysis to date, FHWA has classified the proposed project as aCategorical Exclusion. Considering public comment on the proposed Section 4(f) deminimis Impact Finding, FHWA would seek written concurrence from the City ofTillamook before issuing the final Section 4(f) de minimis Impact Finding for theHoquarten Trail Interpretive Park.

Right-of-Way Acquisition, Design and Construction. Upon successful completion ofNEPA and related processes and documentation, ODOT would be authorized to acquireneeded right-of-way, complete design and construct the project. Currently, ODOT


17/202

PREFACE

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xvii ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 PREFACE

intends to exclusively use State of Oregon funds to design and construct the project(using funds authorized under the Jobs and Transportation Act of 2009). Right-of-wayacquisition and design would be initiated as soon as late 2012, while construction wouldlikely start in 2015.


18/202

PREFACE

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE xviii ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 PREFACE



19/202

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE 1-1 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT

JUNE 4, 2012 CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT

1 Purpose and Need for the ProjectThis chapter describes the Purpose and Need for the Tillamook U.S. Highway 101 (US 101)/Oregon State Highway 6 (OR 6) Project and the projects objectives, which form the structurefor the evaluation of the two alternatives considered in this Alternatives Analysis Report(AA Report). This chapter also describes the projects setting, including a description of theproject study area (illustrated in Figure 1-1) and the projects planning and policyframework.

1.1 Project Purpose and Need and ObjectivesThis section describes the project purpose, need, and objectives, which provide a context forunderstanding why ODOT is proposing improvements to US 101 and OR 6 in downtown

Tillamook. They also establish the structure within which the alternatives have been andwill be evaluated.

1.1.1 Project PurposeThe Purpose of the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project is to improve the design, trafficperformance, and safety of US 101 and OR 6 intersections in downtown Tillamook andacross Hoquarten Slough while supporting local land use and economic development goalsand objectives; ensuring a fiscally-responsible design; and being sensitive to importantadjacent parks and natural resources.

1.1.2 Project NeedThe Need for the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project results from the following:

1. During peak periods, future vehicular volumes on US 101 and OR 6 in downtownTillamook are projected to exceed available intersection capacity and future intersectionqueues would back up through adjacent intersections (and to a lesser degree, peakperiod queues at those intersections currently back up through adjacent intersections).

Based on historic traffic patterns and trends, vehicular volumes on US 101 and OR 6in downtown Tillamook will increase approximately 60 percent by 2036. If noroadway improvements are made, the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT) forecasts that vehicle volumes would exceed capacity at three signalizedintersections on US 101 and OR 6 in downtown Tillamook during peak periods

(Main Avenue [US 101]/1st Street [OR 6], Main Avenue [US 101]/3rd Street [OR 6],and Main Avenue [US 101]/4th Street).


20/202

PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED AND OBJECTIVES




21/202

PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED AND OBJECTIVES



Vehicular queues at the four US 101/OR 6 intersections (Main and Pacific Avenuesat 1st and 3rd Streets) currently, and will continue to, back up into upstreamintersections during peak periods, due in part to relatively short block lengths indowntown Tillamook (north-south blocks are 200 feet long and east-west blocks are150 feet long). Queues that extend into upstream intersections exacerbate the

capacity constraints of those intersections. Travel patterns on US 101 and OR 6 within downtown Tillamook can be confusing to

infrequent users.

The intersections of 1st Street and Pacific Avenue and 1st Street and Main Avenueconstitute the northern terminus of the US 101 couplet in downtown Tillamook(Pacific and Main Avenues). Northbound traffic on Pacific Avenue currentlytransitions to Main Avenue via a short (200 feet) block on 1st Street (OR 6). Theabrupt northern end of the couplet and transition to the three-lane bridge overHoquarten Slough (one lane in the northbound direction) leads to vehicles beingpositioned in the wrong travel lane on 1st Street between Pacific and Main Avenues.

2. The travel lanes on US 101 in downtown Tillamook are too narrow to adequatelyaccommodate current and projected levels of automobile, truck and recreational vehicletraffic, while maintaining on-street parking.

Due to downtown Tillamooks proximity to industrial development and resourcelands and to regional and statewide recreational sites, about 7 to 9 percent of vehicleson US 101 and OR 6 in 2010 were medium and large-sized trucks and recreationalvehicles.

The existing travel lanes on Pacific and Main Avenues (US 101) between 1st and 4thStreets are 10 feet wide, which cannot safely accommodate two side-by-side largetrucks (a semi-truck is approximately 10 feet wide).

3. Narrow travel lanes on US 101 and the confusing traffic patterns at the convergence ofUS 101 and OR 6 at the Main Avenue/1st Street and Pacific Avenue/1st Streetintersections likely contribute to the relatively high number of low-speed crashes onstate roadways within the project study area (within the top 25 percent for similarfacilities statewide between 2008 and 2010).

4. The existing free-flow right turn from westbound OR 6 to northbound US 101, which isdesigned to improve vehicular operations through the intersection, does not allowcrosswalks on the north and east sides of the Main Avenue/1st Street intersection,requiring out-of-direction travel for pedestrians.

5. Local plans, policies, and objectives for downtown Tillamook are based on and are to besupported by a state highway network that can accommodate increasing local, regional,and state travel demand.

In 2006, ODOT, in cooperation with the City of Tillamook and Tillamook County,completed the Tillamook Transportation Refinement Plan (TTRP) (ODOT et al., 2006).The plan identifies a variety of transportation issues in downtown Tillamook and led


22/202

PROJECT SETTING



to an analysis and screening of alternatives to be evaluated within the TillamookUS 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study.

The City of Tillamook Comprehensive Plan (City of Tillamook, 1972, amended 2003)includes policies, goals, and objectives related to promoting economic development,guiding vehicular circulation and parking, and encouraging a safe, convenient, and

economical transportation system.

6. There are topographic, natural environment, and built environment constraints withinthe study area that can limit the ability of ODOT to improve the highway infrastructurein the study area, including:

Current transportation infrastructure and development in and north of downtownTillamook;

Sue H. Elmore and Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Parks; and

Hoquarten Slough and federally-listed species and critical habitat within the slough.

7. Funding ($27 million) for the planning, engineering design, and construction of theproposed project is being provided through State of Oregons Oregon Jobs andTransportation Act of 2009 (House Bill 2001).

1.1.3 Project ObjectivesThe projects objectives are the key elements of the projects Purpose Statement and are usedto organize the criteria used to evaluate the alternatives:

Improve mobility in the study area;

Improve safety for vehicles and pedestrians in the study area;

Minimize adverse effects to the natural and community environment; and

Comply with and support local land use and transportation policies, plans, goals,and objectives.

Chapter 4 summarizes the performance of each alternative in meeting the projects PurposeStatement, based on the projects objectives.

1.2 Project SettingThis section describes the project setting, which includes the project study area and theplanning and policy framework.

1.2.1 Project Study AreaThe project study area (Figure 1-1) is located within Tillamook city limits, which is locatedapproximately 6 miles inland from the northern Oregon Coast. Tillamook is the county seatof Tillamook County. US 101 and OR 6 intersect in downtown Tillamook, immediatelysouth of Hoquarten Slough. US 101 is the primary north-south highway on the OregonCoast, connecting coastal communities from California to Washington. OR 6 connects the


23/202

PROJECT SETTING



northern Oregon Coast (via US 101) and Tillamook with the Willamette Valley and thePortland metropolitan area (via US Highway 26). Main Avenue (US 101 southbound) andPacific Avenue (US 101 northbound) form the US 101 couplet in downtown Tillamook. FirstStreet (OR 6 westbound) and 3rd Street (OR 6 eastbound) form the OR 6 couplet indowntown Tillamook. The western terminus of OR 6 is at US 101. Figure 1-1 depicts the

project study area.The project study area is located in an urban setting with mixed commercial, recreational,and residential land uses. Hoquarten Slough, which flows east to west, traverses anddivides the project study area. US 101 crosses the slough via a three-lane bridge built in1931. Hoquarten Slough begins approximately 0.5 mile northeast of Tillamook and endsapproximately 2 miles west of the US 101 bridge, at the confluence of the Dougherty Slough,which flows into the Trask River. The Trask River flows into Tillamook Bay.

Two City of Tillamook public parks Sue H. Elmore Park (formerly Marine Park) andHoquarten Interpretive Trail Park (Phase One) are located immediately south ofHoquarten Slough and adjacent to US 101. The Port of Tillamook Bay owns an undeveloped

former railroad corridor located south of Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park and east ofUS 101. Commercial and civic land uses are concentrated within downtown Tillamook.Main Avenue and Pacific Avenue are the central core of downtown Tillamook. Civic landuses include the Tillamook City Hall, the Tillamook County Courthouse, the TillamookCounty Pioneer Museum, the Tillamook Transit and Visitor Center, and the Tillamook U.S.Post Office. Single-family residential land uses are located on the eastern and westernextents of the project study area.

Within the project study area north of Hoquarten Slough, all land uses are commercial.However, many of the commercial structures are vacant because the entire project studyarea north of Hoquarten Slough, including all of US 101, is within the sloughs floodwayand 100-year floodplain. This area regularly experiences flooding events that affect

businesses and close US 101. Because of the frequency of these events, the City of Tillamookand the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) have begun the process ofpurchasing properties and relocating businesses. Therefore, the City of Tillamook does notanticipate that this area will develop further. ODOT evaluated raising the elevation of US101 between Hoquarten Slough and the Dougherty Slough. However, ODOT determinedthat US 101 would need to be built on structure to remain open during floods, which wouldentail high costs and adverse environmental effects. For this reason and because WilsonRiver Loop Road provides an alternate detour route during flooding events, ODOT did notpursue a project to raise the elevation of US 101 north of Hoquarten Slough.

1.2.2 Planning and Policy FrameworkThis section provides an overview of the planning and policy framework within whichODOT has developed and evaluated alternatives and options that address the projectsPurpose and Need.

1.2.2.1 Oregon Highway PlanThe Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) (ODOT, 1999, amended 2011) designates US 101 (MainAvenue and Pacific Avenue) between 1st Street and 12th Street in downtown Tillamook as aSpecial Transportation Area (STA). The OHP designates US 101 as a Statewide Highway


24/202

PROJECT SETTING



and OR 6 as a Regional Highway. OR 6 in the project study area is designated a FreightRoute.

An STA is an ODOT-designated district that may be applied to a state highway segment thatis located within an existing downtown or other area of compact development. According tothe OHP (page 49):

The primary objective of an STA is to provide access to and circulation amongstcommunity activities, businesses and residences and to accommodate pedestrian,bicycle and transit movement along and across the highway. Direct streetconnections and shared on-street parking are encouraged. Local auto, pedestrian,bicycle and transit movements to the area are generally as important as the throughmovement of traffic. Traffic speeds are slow, generally 25 miles per hour or lower.

According to the Oregon Highway Design Manual (HDM) (ODOT, 2003), the standard widthfor travel lanes within an STA is at least 10 feet, but at least 11 feet is preferred. The standardwidth for sidewalks within an STA is 10 feet.

1.2.2.2 City of Tillamook Comprehensive Plan 2003The City ofTillamook Comprehensive Plan (City of Tillamook, 1972, amended 2003) includespolicies, goals, and objectives related to promoting economic development, guidingvehicular circulation and parking, and encouraging a safe, convenient, and economicaltransportation system. STA goals and objectives, and local plans, policies, and objectives fordowntown Tillamook provide the planning and policy context for the project setting. Thesegoals and objectives for downtown Tillamook are based on, and are to be supported by, astate highway network that can accommodate increasing local, regional, and state traveldemand.

1.2.2.3 Tillamook Transportation System Plan 2003The 2003 Tillamook Transportation System Plan (Tillamook TSP) (City of Tillamook, 2003)identifies issues related to the adverse effects of traffic on US 101 and OR 6 in downtownTillamook. These issues include the desire to minimize the effects of local and throughfreight traffic in downtown Tillamook and in residential neighborhoods. The 2003 TillamookTSP studies these issues at a cursory level and does not recommend specific solutions.However, the 2003 Tillamook TSP recommends additional study of the effects of traffic onUS 101 and OR 6 in downtown Tillamook. The 2003 Tillamook TSP also identifies for furtherstudy a number of proposed improvements to vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian safety in thedowntown area, including changes to intersections to improve mobility and safety. None ofthese improvements are funded.

1.2.2.4 Tillamook Transportation Refinement Plan 2006In 2006, ODOT, in cooperation with the City of Tillamook and Tillamook County, developedthe TTRP (ODOT et al., 2006) to address a variety of transportation issues andrecommendations included in the 2004 Tillamook TSP. These included the following itemsrelated to mobility in downtown Tillamook:


25/202

PROJECT SETTING



Modifying on-street parking

Reducing truck traffic

Evaluating design improvements on Main Avenue and Pacific Avenue (the US 101couplet)

The TTRP identifies the following recommendations for further study:

Implement two-way traffic on 1st and 3rd Streets to reduce congestion and reduce trucktrips downtown

Add an additional northbound travel lane over Hoquarten Slough

Implement a combination of the two above recommendations

Consider other traffic solutions at 1st Street and Main and Pacific Avenues, either aloneor in combination with one of the above options

These recommendations for further study from the TTRP were adopted in the TillamookTSP1 and were forwarded into a subsequent alternatives analysis (that is, the US 101/OR 6Alternatives Study), summarized below.

1.2.2.5 US 101/OR 6 Alternatives StudyBetween January 2009 and March 2010, ODOT, in cooperation with the City of Tillamookand Tillamook County, considered a wide range of alternatives to improve the safety andmobility of US 101 and OR 6 in downtown Tillamook, including the recommendations fromthe TTRP. The US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study focused on improving mobility and safety atthe four intersections of US 101 and OR 6 in downtown Tillamook:

Main Avenue (US 101 southbound) and 1st Street (OR 6 westbound)

Main Avenue (US 101 southbound) and 3rd Street (OR 6 eastbound) Pacific Avenue (US 101 northbound) and 1st Street (OR 6 westbound) Pacific Avenue (US 101 northbound) and 3rd Street (OR 6 eastbound)

Chapter 2 summarizes the decision-making process used to evaluate and screen thealternatives identified during the US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study and identifies thealternatives that were advanced.

1 City Ordinance #1208 adopted the TTRP as a supporting document to the Tillamook TSP and amended the Tillamook TSP toinclude the TTRP on April 17, 2006.


26/202

PROJECT SETTING





27/202

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE 2-1 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 CHAPTER 2 ALTERNATIVES

2 Alternatives

This chapter summarizes the development, screening, and identification of project

alternatives for evaluation in this Alternatives Analysis Report (AA Report). This chapter isdivided into three sections:

Section 2.1 (Screening and Selection Process). Describes the process used to screenoptions and alternatives, and identifies the process to recommend an alternative.

Section 2.2 (Alternatives and Options Previously Considered). Outlines the processused to identify and screen options during the planning process, and summarizes thealternatives developed but not carried forward for further analysis in this AA Report.

Section 2.3 (Description of Alternatives). Describes the alternatives evaluated in thisAA Report.

Appendix G provides information on how to obtain the documents referenced in thischapter.

2.1 Screening and Selection Process

This section describes the two-step process that will lead to the selection of a PreferredAlternative: A) Screening of Options and Alternatives; and B) Selection of the PreferredAlternative.

A. Screening of Options and Alternatives

The identification of options to improve mobility and safety in downtown Tillamook beganwith the TTRP and continued through a multi-step screening, evaluation, and refinementprocess during the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study.

During the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study, ODOT established a process toidentify and narrow options and alternatives for further study.

1. Develop Planning-level Evaluation Framework

ODOT developed a planning-level evaluation framework to gauge the effectiveness ofreasonable alternatives. ODOT solicited public input on the planning-level evaluationframework at an open house in January 2009.

2. Develop and Screen Options

ODOT worked with community and agency stakeholders to identify a range of optionsthat addressed the problem statement and screened those options based on theplanning-level evaluation framework.

3. Develop Alternatives

From the various options that were advanced for further study, ODOT developed a setof alternatives for more detailed evaluation. In general, each alternative incorporated aunique set of options selected for further study.


28/202

ALTERNATIVES AND OPTIONS PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED


4. Screen Alternatives

ODOT screened the alternatives using the planning-level evaluation framework andidentified alternatives for further evaluation in this AA Report.

Each step of this screening process included public input and review by the Stakeholder

Advisory Committee (SAC) and the Project Management Team (PMT) (see Chapter 5).

B. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

ODOT established the following process to evaluate the alternatives in this AA Report:

1. Develop Purpose and Need

Develop a purpose and need statement to establish the need for the project and definethe problems that the project is expected to address.

2. Develop Objectives

Develop objectives based on the purpose and need statement.

3. Evaluate Alternatives Using the Objectives

Evaluate the alternatives using the projects objectives.

Chapter 5 (Public Involvement and Agency Coordination) summarizes the project decision-making and public and agency involvement.

Following publication of this AA Report and a subsequent public comment period, the PMTwill recommend a Preferred Alternative to ODOT. The PMT will base the recommendationon the effects to the transportation system and the natural and community environmentdocumented in this AA Report; input from the SAC; and public and agency comments onthis AA Report.

2.2 Alternatives and Options Previously Considered

As summarized in Section 1.2.2, the TTRP considered options to address a variety oftransportation issues identified in the Tillamook TSP. The TTRP recommended additionalstudy of three options in downtown Tillamook to reduce congestion and improve safety.

Between January 2009 and March 2010, ODOT, in cooperation with the City of Tillamookand Tillamook County, considered the three options and identified a range of other options.The following paragraphs summarize the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project Alternatives andOptions Previously Considered Technical Memorandum (ODOT, 2011a), which documents theoptions and alternatives considered and the framework for screening options and

alternatives.

ODOT hosted an open house in January 2009 to identify other options and to gatheradditional ideas for improvements. ODOT also solicited ideas from other stakeholders,including the SAC. Through this process, 11 new options were identified. The resulting14 options (3 from the TTRP and 11 new options) were screened against the projectsproblem statement.


29/202



The following four options were dismissed from consideration because they would not meetkey elements of the problem statement:

Close Pacific Avenue from 2nd Street to 1st Street and replace the traffic signal at the1st Street/Pacific Avenue intersection with a stop sign. This option would not improvemobility and would route highway traffic onto streets classified as local streets and

collectors in the Tillamook TSP.

Extend OR 6 on 1st Street five blocks to the west of Main Avenue to connect back intoOregon State Highway 131 (OR 131; 3rd Street) west of US 101 and remove trafficfrom 3rd Street. This option would not improve mobility and would route highwaytraffic onto streets classified as local streets and collectors in the Tillamook TSP.

Construct a new four-lane road down the center of the block between Main andPacific Avenues and redevelop downtown. This option would remove all structuresbetween Main and Pacific Avenues from 1st Street to 4th Street, which would displacebusinesses and weaken the economic vitality of downtown Tillamook.

Construct a new four-lane road on Pacific Avenue with a new bridge at PacificAvenue. This option would remove all structures on the west or east side of PacificAvenue from 1st Street to 4th Street, which would displace businesses and weaken theeconomic vitality of downtown Tillamook.

The remaining 10 options were combined to form five alternatives, named Alternatives Athrough E (Table 2-1). The five alternatives were rated using measures tied to the TillamookUS 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study goals and objectives. The performance of the alternativesand input from the public and the SAC were used to screen alternatives. The SAC reviewedthe results of the screening assessment in April 2009 and the public reviewed the results atan open house in June 2009. Table 2-2 shows the alternatives considered and a summary ofthe rationale for advancing or dismissing them (see theAlternatives and Options Previously

Considered Technical Memorandum for more detailed information, including the quantitativeand qualitative measures used to screen the alternatives).

The following performance measures were the most relevant for comparing alternatives:

Future mobility at study intersections compared to future mobility at the same studyintersections if the project were not built, measured by the volume-to-capacity (v/c)ratio2

Economic vitality of downtown Tillamook, measured by the number of on-streetparking spaces removed and retained

Sensitivity to the community and natural environment, measured by a qualitativeassessment of natural resource, park, and business effects

2 A volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio is a ratio of traffic flow rate to capacity of the road to handle that traffic flow. A v/c ratio at orover 1.0 indicates the road or intersection is over-capacity; a v/c ratio under 1.0 indicates additional vehicles can beaccommodated.


30/202



TABLE 2-1Options that Formed Alternatives

Option Resolution

Op

tions

Id

en

tifie

d

During

the

TTRP

Modify 1st Street and 3rd Street to two-way traffic Included inAlternative A

Widen the existing Hoquarten Slough bridge Included inAlternative C

Modify 1st Street and 3rd Street to two-way traffic and extend Pacific Avenue to thenorth

Included inAlternative B

Op

tions

Identi

fie

dDuring

the

US

101/OR

6Alterna

tives

Study

Extend Pacific Avenue with a bridge over Hoquarten Slough; two-way traffic on 1stStreet and 3rd Street


Extend Pacific Avenue over Hoquarten Slough; modify existing bridge on US 101 toone-way traffic


Extend Pacific Avenue and connect to US 101 mainline just north of slough; widenexisting bridge


Construct new bridges east and west of existing bridge, at Pacific Avenue and Stillwell

Avenuea with a new signalized intersection north of Hoquarten Slough

Included in

Alternative D

Modify 1st Street and 3rd Street to two-way traffic; add an additional northbound laneover slough

Included inAlternative E

Reduce sidewalk width from 12 to 10 feet on each side of Main Avenue and PacificAvenue in the downtown couplet

Included forany alternative

Consider opportunities to redesign local streets to provide additional on-street parking Included forany alternative

aStillwell Avenue is two blocks west of Main Avenue.

Source: Tillamook US 101/OR 6 ProjectAlternatives and Options Previously Considered TechnicalMemorandum(ODOT, 2011a)

The US 101/OR 6 Transportation Alternatives Study: Alternatives Evaluation Findings TechnicalMemorandum (ODOT, 2009) provides the results of this analysis and the design refinementprocess that identified a cross-section for US 101 (Main and Pacific Avenues) and the OR 6couplet (1st and 3rd Streets).

In summary, ODOT initially selected the following two build alternatives from the fivealternatives to advance into this AA Report for further study:

Alternative B: Extend Pacific Avenue north approximately one block and build a newbridge over Hoquarten Slough adjacent to the existing US 101 for northbound US 101traffic, and make various traffic improvements in downtown Tillamook.

Alternative C: Reconstruct the existing US 101 bridge across Hoquarten Slough toaccommodate four lanes, bike lanes, and sidewalks, and make various trafficimprovements in downtown Tillamook.


31/202



TABLE 2-2Summary of Rationale for Advancing or Dismissing Alternatives

AlternativeAdvanced orDismissed Summary of Rationale for Advancing or Dismissing

Alternative A

Convert 1st Street and 3rdStreet in downtown Tillamook totwo-way traffic

Dismissed Would not improve traffic issues (traffic operations and

queuing)

Would have the worst traffic performance of all thealternatives

Would not improve mobility at the Main Avenue /1st Street intersection, an intersection that would exceedmobility standards in the No-Build Alternative

Alternative B

Extend Pacific Avenue northand build a new bridge overHoquarten Slough adjacent tothe existing US 101 fornorthbound US 101 traffic

Advanced Would remove the least number of on-street parkingspaces (between 30 and 40 spaces, which is the same aswith Alternative C)

Would provide a clear route for northbound US 101 trafficfrom the downtown Tillamook couplet

Would avoid effects to Sue H. Elmore Park and minimizeeffects on Main Avenue because the existing bridge wouldremain for southbound US 101 traffic

Alternative C

Reconstruct the existing US101 bridge across HoquartenSlough to accommodate fourlanes, bike lanes, andsidewalks

Advanced Would remove the least number of on-street parkingspaces (between 30 and 40 spaces; which is the same aswith Alternative B)

Would remove the existing US 101 bridge that is within the100-year floodplain and replace it with a new bridge abovethe floodplain

Alternative D

Construct two new bridgesacross Hoquarten Slough at

Pacific Avenue and StillwellAvenue

Dismissed Would generally cost as much as 50 percent more thanthe other alternatives because it would require theconstruction of two new bridges across Hoquarten Slough,new bridge approaches for both bridges, and related

roadway improvements

Would require more right-of-way and would have morenegative natural resource and park effects in theHoquarten Slough area than the other alternativesbecause two new bridges would be constructed

Alternative E(Combination of Alternatives Aand C)

Convert 1st Street and 3rdStreet in downtown Tillamook totwo-way streets and reconstructthe existing bridge to

accommodate four travel lanes

Dismissed Would not address traffic issues better than Alternatives Band C (traffic operations and queuing)

Would remove approximately twice as many on-streetparking spaces as Alternatives B and C (approximately 75spaces), which would adversely affect the economicvitality of downtown Tillamook

Source: Tillamook US 101/OR 6 ProjectAlternatives and Options Previously Considered TechnicalMemorandum(ODOT, 2011a). This memorandum includes figures showing Alternatives A through E.

To designate the two alternative designs more descriptively, ODOT changed their names Alternative B became the Extend Pacific Avenue North Alternative and Alternative Cbecame the Replace US 101 Bridge Alternative. ODOT also advanced a no-buildalternative for additional study. The No-Build Alternative would retain the existing


32/202



conditions and maintenance activities would be conducted to ensure continued operationsof the roadway and bridge.

2.2.1 Revised Build Alternative Designs

The two Build Alternative designs (Alternative B Extend Pacific Avenue North and

Alternative C Replace US 101 Bridge) were carried forward for evaluation in March 2010.In response to questions from the public concerning federal, state, and local guidelines thatwere used to define a concept for the proposed replacement bridge across HoquartenSlough, ODOT initiated a process to re-evaluate the bridge concepts of the Build Alternativedesigns. The purpose of the redesign effort was to avoid or minimize adverse effects toparks and access to properties south and north of Hoquarten Slough, and to further improvetraffic operations and roadway design.

The two resulting designs of the Build Alternative (Alternative B Extend Pacific AvenueNorth and Alternative C Replace US 101 Bridge) were substantially the same following thedesign-refinement process. The common design elements included removing the existingbridge, constructing a new four-lane bridge over Hoquarten Slough, and making the sameroadway design generally south of 1st Street, east of Pacific Avenue, west of Main Avenue,and north of Hoquarten Slough. Through the process, the PMT concluded that the newbridge could be designed to meet ODOTs bridge and hydraulic guidelines, whileminimizing changes to access to the properties south and north of Hoquarten Slough, andminimizing adverse effects to Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park and Sue H. Elmore Park.ODOT also confirmed that the removal of the existing bridge and the revised design of thenew bridge would not increase the 100-year water surface elevation. The design that wouldextend Pacific Avenue north was also modified to operate better than the No-BuildAlternative at the intersections of 1st Street at Main and Pacific Avenues through theaddition of dedicated turn lanes.

ODOT selected the proposed design for evaluation in this AA Report that would extendPacific Avenue north because it would better meet the projects Purpose and Need by:

Providing a more intuitive local traffic pattern by extending Pacific Avenue north of1st Street

Adding more net parkland to Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park

Providing for two additional crosswalks in downtown Tillamook

Allowing for better traffic operations at the Main Avenue (US 101) and 1st Street (OR 6)intersection

In identifying the preferred Build Alternative design, ODOT also considered comments thatrepresentatives of local jurisdictions and members of the public made at the followingevents: a PMT meeting on January 12, 2011; an SAC meeting on January 25, 2011; and anOpen House held on February 2, 2011. At each of these events, ODOT presented the tworevised Build Alternative designs and its recommendation to carry forward only theproposed design of the Build Alternative that would extend Pacific Avenue north. The PMTand the SAC unanimously endorsed the redesigns and ODOTs recommendation.


33/202

DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES


In February 2011, ODOT, in consultation with the local jurisdictions and members of thepublic, advanced the Extend Pacific Avenue North design as the proposed Build Alternativefor evaluation in this AA Report. The Replace US 101 Bridge design was eliminated fromfurther consideration.

2.3 Description of AlternativesTwo alternatives are evaluated in this AA Report the No-Build Alternative and the BuildAlternative. The following sections provide a description of those two alternatives. TheTillamook US 101/OR 6 Project Alternative Description Technical Memorandum (ODOT, 2012f)describes the No-Build Alternative and the Build Alternative in more detail.

2.3.1 No-Build Alternative

In addition to being a viable alternative, the No-Build Alternative provides a baselineagainst which to measure and compare the effects of the build alternative(s). This baselinehelps decision-makers assess what would happen in the future if nothing were done to

address the problem.

The No-Build Alternative related to the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project would generallyretain and would not improve existing transportation facilities in the project study area (seeFigure 1-1). Maintenance activities on those facilities would be conducted to ensurecontinued operations of the roadway and bridge. Figure 2-1 illustrates No-Build Alternativeroadway cross-sections for selected locations. There are no other funded transportationprojects in the project study area; therefore, no other transportation projects are included inthe No-Build Alternative.

2.3.2 Build Alternative

Figure 2-2 illustrates the Build Alternative and Figure 2-1 illustrates roadway cross-sectionsfor selected locations. In general, the Build Alternative would:

Widen the travel lanes by approximately 2 feet and narrow the sidewalks byapproximately 2 feet on Main and Pacific Avenues between 1st and 4th Streets

Extend the existing US 101 couplet (Main and Pacific Avenues) by extending PacificAvenue north from the existing Pacific Avenue/1st Street intersection to HoquartenSlough

Replace the existing three-lane bridge across Hoquarten Slough with a new four-lanebridge, which would be up to 5 feet higher than the existing bridge, and which wouldinclude bike lanes and wider sidewalks

Reconstruct US 101 approximately 700 feet north of Hoquarten Slough to accommodatethe new grade and width of the bridge over Hoquarten Slough

Modify access to Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park by constructing a new public streetthat would also provide access to adjacent private parcels


34/202


TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE 2-8 JUNE 4, 2012


35/202




36/202



Under the Build Alternative, ODOT would determine during the design phase whether todivide the project into separate construction phases or to construct the project at one time.The projects construction schedule and approach could entail, for example, dividing thecontracted work geographically or by construction type (e.g., bridge work, roadwork).Whether the construction work is divided into separate contracts, major elements of the

project could be scheduled concurrently, with some overlap or sequentially. In developing aconstruction schedule and approach, ODOT would consider several factors, such aspotential contractor expertise, costs, minimizing construction impacts, traffic operations,environmental constraints, etc.

The following subsections describe the elements of the Build Alternative from south to northin more detail.

2.3.2.1 South of 1st Street

All proposed improvements south of 1st Street under the Build Alternative would occurwithin existing street right-of-way. The travel lanes on the US 101 couplet (the Main Avenueand Pacific Avenue paired one-way streets) between 1st Street and 4th Street would be

widened from approximately 10 feet to approximately 12 feet by narrowing the sidewalksfrom approximately 12 feet to approximately 10 feet. On-street parking on both sides ofMain and Pacific Avenues would be maintained. Figure 2-1 illustrates the proposed cross-section of Main and Pacific Avenues south of 1st Street. The eastbound approach of theMain Avenue and 3rd Street intersection would be modified as illustrated in Figure 2-2.

2.3.2.2 Main Avenue and 1st Street Intersection

The intersection at Main Avenue and 1st Street would be modified within existing streetright-of-way as illustrated in Figure 2-2.

2.3.2.3 Pacific Avenue and 1st Street Intersection

A new northbound leg to the Pacific Avenue and 1st Street intersection would beconstructed for northbound US 101 traffic. This intersection and 1st Street between PacificAvenue and Laurel Avenue would be modified as illustrated in Figure 2-2. Figure 2-1illustrates the proposed cross-section of 1st Street west and east of the 1st Street and PacificAvenue intersection.

2.3.2.4 Between 1st Street and Hoquarten Slough

The elevation of US 101 north of 1st Street would be raised to match the elevation of theproposed replacement bridge over Hoquarten Slough. Access to and from Front Street fromMain Avenue would be maintained.

Pacific Avenue would be extended north from 1st Street to south of Hoquarten Slough,where it would merge with Main Avenue, extending the Main Avenue/Pacific Avenuecouplet of US 101 by approximately one city block. A new local public street would beconstructed that would intersect with and extend east of the Pacific Avenue extension toprovide access to Hoquarten Interpretive Trail Park. This would maintain right-in/right-outaccess to the park from northbound US 101.


37/202



2.3.2.5 Hoquarten Slough Bridge

The existing three-lane US 101 bridge across Hoquarten Slough would be removed underthe Build Alternative and a new four-lane bridge across Hoquarten Slough would beconstructed. In addition, existing remnant concrete piers from a prior bridge (locatedimmediately east of the existing bridge) would be removed to facilitate construction and

maintenance of the new bridge. The new bridge would be approximately 84 feet wide.Figure 2-1 illustrates the proposed cross-section of the new bridge. The new bridge wouldhave a center set of piers within Hoquarten Slough. At the highest point on the new bridge,the bottom of its spans would be approximately 5 feet higher than the bottom of the existingbridge to be consistent with ODOTs bridge design criteria. These design criteria factor inthe 50-year flood elevation, clearance above the 50-year flood elevation, and forecasted sea-level rise. For more information, see the Hydraulic Bridge Height Recommendation for ProposedUS 101 Hoquarten Slough Bridge Technical Memorandum (ODOT, 2011d). In general, trafficacross Hoquarten Slough would be maintained during construction. Section 3.7 (VisualResources) provides simulations of the view from and towards the proposed new bridge.

2.3.2.6 US 101 North of Hoquarten SloughTo tie the US 101 improvements into the existing US 101 alignment, the Build Alternativewould reconstruct US 101 from Hoquarten Slough to approximately 700 feet north ofHoquarten Slough. US 101 would include wider sidewalks and a shared shoulder/bicyclelane in both directions. Figure 2-1 illustrates the proposed cross-section of this section ofUS 101.

2.3.2.7 Build Alternative Cost and Financing

ODOT developed construction cost estimates for the Build Alternative. The estimated cost toconstruct the Build Alternative is $21.7 million (in year of expenditure dollars). This costestimate includes construction and engineering costs based on 2015 dollars and right-of-way

costs based on 2014 dollars. (Under the current project schedule, right-of-way would beacquired between late 2012 and 2015, and construction would begin in 2015.) This estimateis based on current design and might change as the project design and mitigation measuresare refined.

Planning, engineering design, and construction would be funded as part of the State ofOregons Jobs and Transportation Act (JTA) of 2009. As adopted by the 2009 StateLegislature, the annual transportation funding from the JTA is approximately $300 million.3The JTA allocated $27 million towards planning, engineering design, and construction forthe Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project.

3 More information about the JTA can be found at http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/JTA.shtml.


38/202





39/202

TILLAMOOK US 101/OR 6 PROJECT PAGE 3-1 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORTJUNE 4, 2012 CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

3 Affected Environment and EnvironmentalConsequences

This chapter describes the effects of the No-Build Alternative and the Build Alternative onthe transportation system and on the natural and community environments for thefollowing topics:

Transportation (Section 3.1) Land Use (Section 3.2) Right-of-Way and Utilities (Section 3.3) Socioeconomics (Section 3.4) Parks and Recreational Resources (Section 3.5) Cultural Resources (Section 3.6)

Visual Resources (Section 3.7) Water Resources (Section 3.8) Biological Resources (Section 3.9) Air Quality (Section 3.10) Noise (Section 3.11) Hazardous Materials (Section 3.12) Geological Resources (Section 3.13)

Each section describes the existing environment that could be affected and identifies theexpected direct and indirect environmental effects.

Direct effects are defined as those permanent effects that are caused by proposed

alternative actions and occur at the same time and place as those actions.

Indirect effects are defined as those permanent effects that are caused by proposedalternative actions and are later in time or farther removed in distance but are stillreasonably foreseeable.

These sections also identify, where applicable, avoidance, minimization, and mitigationmeasures for adverse effects on the transportation system and on the natural andcommunity environments.

Cumulative effects of the Build Alternative are addressed in Section 3.14. Short-term effectsrelated to activities for constructing the Build Alternative are addressed in Section 3.15.

Cumulative effects are defined as effects on the environment resulting from theincremental effect of the proposed action when added to other past, present, andreasonably foreseeable future actions.

Construction effects are defined as those short-term effects that are caused byconstructing the Build Alternative and end once construction has been completed.

For more information about each of the topics, please see the appropriate technicaldocuments, which are listed in Appendix G. Appendix G also includes information on how


40/202

TRANSPORTATION


to obtain the supporting documents referenced in this chapter. This chapter summarizes thetechnical documentation, which is incorporated by reference into this chapter.

3.1 Transportation

This section describes the affected environment for transportation and summarizes thepotential traffic effects of the No-Build Alternative and the Build Alternative (see Section 3.4[Socioeconomics] for a summary of effects on transit and bicycle and pedestrian facilities).Section 3.14 summarizes the traffic cumulative effects of the Build Alternative. Section 3.15summarizes the transportation construction effects of the Build Alternative. For moreinformation on the transportation analysis, see the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 ProjectTransportation Technical Report (ODOT, 2012o).

Table 3-1 summarizes the transportation effects of the No-Build Alternative and the BuildAlternative. More detailed information is provided in Section 3.1.2 (EnvironmentalConsequences).

TABLE 3-1Summary of Transportation Effects

EffectNo-Build

Alternativeb Build Alternative

b

2036 US 101 Average Daily Traffic (northbound / southbound)a

17,125/14,725c

17,125/14,725c

2036 PM Peak Hour v/c ratiod

at study area signalized intersections:

Main Avenue/1st StreetMain Avenue/3rd StreetMain Avenue/4th StreetPacific Avenue/1st StreetPacific Avenue/3rd StreetPacific Avenue/4th Street

1.161.261.040.980.940.89

0.881.031.040.930.940.87

Would make modifications to the transportation system that couldimprove transportation safety?

e

No Yes

aAverage daily traffic between Front Street and 1st Street during the summer.

bThe mobility target for the No-Build Alternative is a volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c ratio) of 0.95. The mobility

standard for the Build Alternative is a v/c ratio of 0.90. All ten unsignalized intersections in the transportationstudy area would meet the mobility standard under the Build Alternative in 2036. Of those unsignalizedintersections, one would operate slightly worse under the Build Alternative than under the No-Build Alternative(i.e. 3rd Street and Laurel Avenue). See the Tillamook US 101/OR 6 ProjectTransportation Technical Reportfor additional detail.c

Average daily traffic would be the same for the No-Build Alternative and Build Alternative.d

A v/c ratio (volume-to-capacity ratio) is a ratio of traffic flow rate to capacity of the road to handle that trafficflow. A v/c ratio at or over 1.0 indicates the road or intersection is over-capacity; a v/c ratio under 1.0 indicatesadditional vehicles can be accommodated.e

See Section 3.1.2.2 for details.

Source: Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project Transportation Technical Report(ODOT, 2012o)

3.1.1 Affected Environment

This section describes the transportation study area, existing traffic operations, and existingsafety conditions.


41/202

TRANSPORTATION


3.1.1.1 Transportation Study Area

The projects transportation study area extends to the north along US 101 approximately1,000 feet north of Hoquarten Slough, bordered to the west by Main Avenue, to the south by4th Street, and to the east by Miller Avenue (see Figure 3-1). Table 3-2 summarizes theclassifications and characteristics of the primary and secondary roadways within the

transportation study area. The transportation study area includes roadways that are in thejurisdiction of two agenciesODOT and the City of Tillamook.


42/202

TRANSPORTATION


TABLE 3-2Primary and Secondary Roadway Classifications and Characteristics

Roadway Jurisdiction Classificationa

PostedSpeed

DesignatedBike Lanes

ParkingLanes

Side-walks

Primary Roadways

US 101 (north of slough) ODOT Principal Arterial 35 mph No No YesMain Ave (US 101) ODOT Principal Arterial 20 mph No Yes Yes

Pacific Ave (US 101) ODOT Principal Arterial 20 mph No Yes Yes

1st St (OR 6) ODOT Minor Arterial 25 mph No Intermittent Yes

3rd St (OR 6) ODOT Minor Arterial 20 mph No Yes Intermittent

Secondary Roadways

2nd St City of Tillamook Local Road 20 mph No Intermittent Yes

4th St City of Tillamook Minor Collector 20 mph No Intermittent Yes

Laurel Ave City of Tillamook Local Road 20 mph No Yes Yes

Madrona Ave City of Tillamook Local Road 20 mph No Yes Yes

Ocean Ave City of Tillamook Local Road 20 mph No Yes Yes

Miller Ave City of Tillamook Local Road 20 mph No Yes Yes

aOHP (Primary Roadways) and Tillamook TSP (Secondary Roadways)

mph = miles per hour


The State Highway Classification System in the OHP designates US 101 as a StatewideHighway and OR 6 as a Regional Highway. The OHPalso designates US 101 (Main Avenueand Pacific Avenue) south of Front Street in downtown Tillamook as a SpecialTransportation Area (STA) and OR 6 as a Freight Route. US 101 is part of the NationalHighway System.

None of the roadways within the transportation study area has marked or painted bikelanes (Table 3-2). However, US 101 is a designated State Bike Route (Oregon CoastBikeway). In addition, all local roads in Tillamook are considered shared roadways wherebicyclists and motorists share the same lane.

Sidewalks exist on all blocks within the transportation study area, except on both sides of3rd Street between Miller and Ocean Avenues. Sidewalks on Main and Pacific Avenuesbetween 1st and 4th Streets are 12 feet wide. Sidewalks in other locations generally varybetween 5 and 12 feet in width.

The Tillamook County Transportation District (TCTD) provides fixed-route and dial-a-ridetransit service within the City of Tillamook, as well as to other neighboring cities. TCTD

service operates five transit routes in the transportation study area.

3.1.1.2 Existing Traffic Operations

ODOT developed state highway mobility targets for the OHP4 as a method to gaugereasonable and consistent standards for traffic flow along state highways. These mobilitytargets consider the classification and location of each state highway and are based on

4 The Oregon Transportation Commission adopted the mobility targets on December 21, 2011.


43/202

TRANSPORTATION


volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios. A v/c ratio is a ratio of traffic flow rate to capacity of theroad to handle that traffic flow. A v/c ratio at or over 1.0 indicates the road or intersection isover-capacity; a v/c ratio under 1.0 indicates additional vehicles can be accommodated.

ODOT evaluated existing (2010) traffic operations at 16 study intersections within thetransportation study area (Table 3-3).

TABLE 3-3Study Intersections

Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections

Main Ave (US 101) and 1st St (OR 6) Main Ave (US 101) and 2nd St

Pacific Ave (US 101) and 1st St (OR 6) Pacific Ave (US 101) and 2nd St

Main Ave (US 101) and 3rd St (OR 6) 1st St (OR 6) and Laurel Ave

Pacific Ave (US 101) and 3rd St (OR 6) 1st St (OR 6) and Madrona Ave

Main Ave (US 101) and 4th St 1st St (OR 6) and Ocean Ave

Pacific Ave (US 101) and 4th St 1st St (OR 6) and Miller Ave

3rd St (OR 6) and Laurel Ave

3rd St (OR 6) and Madrona Ave

3rd St (OR 6) and Nestucca Ave

3rd St (OR 6) and Ocean Ave


In 2010, all 16 study intersections met their applicable OHP mobility targets (0.95 forsignalized intersections and 0.90 for the uncontrolled approaches at unsignalizedintersections) during the peak hour of operations, the PM peak-hour. The PM peak-hourwithin the transportation study area was 3:45 to 4:45 p.m.

Table 3-4 provides a summary of transportation existing conditions that includes averagedaily traffic and PM peak-hour v/c ratios at study area signalized intersections. See theTillamook US 101/OR 6 Project Transportation Technical Report for the existing transportationconditions of the other study area intersections (i.e., non-signalized intersections).

TABLE 3-4Summary of Transportation Conditions in 2010

US 101 Average Daily Traffic(northbound/southbound)

a

10,500 / 9,560

PM Peak Hour v/c ratio at the study area signalized intersectionsb:

Main Avenue/1st StreetMain Avenue/3rd StreetMain Avenue/4th StreetPacific Avenue/1st StreetPacific Avenue/3rd StreetPacific Avenue/4th Street

0.680.860.590.560.590.57

aAverage daily traffic between Front Street and 1st Street during the summer.

bThe OHP mobility target for all signalized intersections is a v/c ratio of 0.95. All unsignalized

intersections in the transportation study area met the applicable OHP mobility targets.

Source: Tillamook US 101/OR 6 Project Transportation Technical Report(ODOT, 2012o).


44/202

TRANSPORTATION


3.1.1.3 Existing Safety Conditions

ODOT analyzed vehicle crash data (ODOT, 2010) for roadway segments and studyintersections within the transportation study area to identify existing safety conditions.

Roadway Segments. US 101 northbound, US 101 southbound, OR 6 eastbound, and

OR 6 westbound were analyzed. Three of these four roadway segments (US 101northbound, US 101 southbound, and OR 6 eastbound) had crash rates higher than thestatewide average for similar roadway types. However, the crash rates may beartificially inflated because the roadway segments used to calculate the crash rates areshorter than the typical length (at least one mile). The average crash rate on US 101northbound and southbound in the City of Tillamook was higher than the statewideaverage on principal arterials in rural cities (2.73 crashes per million vehicle miles,compared to 1.18 crashes per million vehicle miles, respectively).

Study Intersections. Each of the 16 study intersections had an intersection crash rate ofless than one crash per million annual vehicles entering the intersection. Typically, whenan intersection crash rate is less than one, it is not considered to be showing signs of

safety deficiencies. However, the low crash rates may be because the study intersectionsare close to each other.

ODOT also assesses roadway safety using the Safety Priority Index System (SPIS), whichtakes into account crash frequency, crash rate, and crash severity. The scores for differentroadway segments can be compared to determine where safety improvement funds mightbest be spent. There were no top-10-percent SPIS locations within the transportation studyarea on the 2011 SPIS list.5

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences

This subsection summarizes the environmental consequences of the No-Build Alternative

and the Build Alternative.

3.1.2.1 No-Build Alternative

In 2036, the following four study intersections are forecast to exceed the applicable OHPmobility target (v/c ratio of 0.95) during the PM peak-hour:

Main Avenue and 1st Street (v/c ratio of 1.16) Pacific Avenue and 1st Street (v/c ratio of 0.98) Main Avenue and 3rd Street (v/c ratio of 1.26) Main Avenue and 4th Street (v/c ratio of 1.04)

Because the No-Build Alternative would maintain the existing roadway facilities, no

changes would be made that would improve transportation safety or operations. Theexisting travel lanes on Pacific and Main Avenues (US 101) are generally 10 feet wide. Theexisting lane width is narrower than ODOTs standard travel-lane width (i.e., at least 11 feetfor US 101 in downtown Tillamook), and too narrow to safely accommodate automobiles,trucks, and recreational vehicles. The No-Build Alternative would maintain existing travel-lane widths and, therefore, would not make modifications that could improve safety.

5 The 2011 SPIS list is based on 2008 to 2010 crash data.


45/202

TRANSPORTATION


3.1.2.2 Build Alternative

Topographic, natural environment (such as Hoquarten Slough, Sue H. Elmore Park, andHoquarten Interpretive Trail Park), and built environment (such as existing commercialbuildings and residences) constraints limit the ability of ODOT to improve the highwayinfrastructure within the transportation study area.

As described in Chapter 2, STA goals and objectives, and local plans, policies, and objectivesfor downtown Tillamook guided the alternatives development and refinement process,along with the topographic, natural environment, and built environment constraints withinthe study area. The TTRP and US 101/OR 6 Alternatives Study included existing and futuretraffic analyses to evaluate and screen options and alternatives. The screening, development,and refinement of alternatives have continued through the duration of the TillamookUS 101/OR 6 Project. These design refinements have focused on improving trafficperformance to meet the goals and objectives of an STA and local plans, while consideringtopographic, natural environment, and built environment constraints.

The following summarizes the traffic operations, travel times, freight route, and safety

effects with the Build Alternative. Bicycle and pedestrian facility and transit direct andindirect effects with the Build Alternative are addressed in Section 3.4.2.2.

Traffic Operations

ODOT uses the mobility standards in the Highway Design Manual (HDM) for projectdevelopment (Build Alternative) traffic analyses. Similar to the OHP mobility targets, theHDM mobility standards consider the classification and location of each state highway andare based on v/c ratios. The applicable HDM mobility standard is a v/c ratio of 0.90 at thesignalized intersections within the transportation study area.

As summarized in Table 3-1, four of the six signalized intersections in the transportationstudy area would perform better in 2036 under the Build Alternative, compared to the No-Build Alternative. The intersections on Main Avenue at 1st and 3rd Streets would operate atv/c ratios of 0.88 and 1.03 under the Build Alternative, respectively, compared to 1.16 and1.25 under the No-Build Alternative. The intersections on Pacific Avenue at 1st and 4thStreets would operate at v/c ratios of 0.93 and 0.87 under the Build Alternative, respectively,compared to 0.98 and 0.89 under the No-Build Alternative.

Also shown in Table 3-1, four signalized intersections in the study are forecast to exceed theHDM mobility standard (v/c ratio of 0.90) during the peak hour of operations in 2036 (thePM peak-hour) under the Build Alternative (i.e., Pacific Avenue and 1st Street, MainAvenue and 3rd Street, Pacific Avenue and 3rd Street, and Main Avenue and 4th Street). Ofthose four intersections, two would operate better than the No-Build Alternative and two

would operate the same as under the No-Build Alternative. During the alternativedevelopment process, ODOT considered design