1 / 7

US 101: Camp Rilea to Surf Pines Lane Facility Plan

US 101: Camp Rilea to Surf Pines Lane Facility Plan. Presentation to ODOT Planners April 25, 2012 Bill Johnston – Area 1 Planner (Astoria). Overview of Presentation. Project overview Practical design considerations Alternate mobility standards NEPA compliance. Study Area.

fergus
Download Presentation

US 101: Camp Rilea to Surf Pines Lane Facility Plan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. US 101: Camp Rilea to Surf Pines Lane Facility Plan Presentation to ODOT Planners April 25, 2012 Bill Johnston – Area 1 Planner (Astoria)

  2. Overview of Presentation • Project overview • Practical design considerations • Alternate mobility standards • NEPA compliance

  3. Study Area 4.6 mile section of US101 South of Warrenton, north of Gearhart Project limits: Camp Rilea (Patriot Way) to Surf Pines Lane Mostly a 2-lane section 4 lanes north and south of study area

  4. Issues • Above average crash rate—50% involve turns • No median—Steep shoulders—Driveways • Inadequate sight distance in some locations • Excessive speed is not a factor—55 mph limit • Congestion from turns and seasonal traffic • Impatient motorists taking risks

  5. Practical design considerations • Constructing 5-lanes is too expensive ($45M) • Full 3-lane is also too expensive ($31M) • 20-year funding assumption to establish performance expectations: $15 • Recommend improving north segment to 3-lanes plus lower-cost spot improvements in rest of corridor

  6. Features Raised medians to limit turning movements U-turns and J-turns Combining and improving intersections Geometric improvements Widening shoulders

  7. Mobility standards, NEPA considerations • Can’t meet mobility targets at intersections • Establish alternate mobility standards by altering acceptable V/C or altering analysis methodology to exclude seasonal peaks • Need to show that spot improvements have “independent utility” for Categorical Exclusion • 3-lane improvement must be evaluated through a single NEPA process (either EA or EIS)

More Related