1 / 19

OR 42: County Line Curves Environmental Assessment Purpose and Need February 17, 2009

OR 42: County Line Curves Environmental Assessment Purpose and Need February 17, 2009. Purpose. The purpose of the project is to cost effectively address safety issues in the OR 42 corridor between mile posts 41.0 and 46.0. Need.

joseph-carroll
Download Presentation

OR 42: County Line Curves Environmental Assessment Purpose and Need February 17, 2009

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. OR 42: County Line CurvesEnvironmental AssessmentPurpose and NeedFebruary 17, 2009

  2. Purpose The purpose of the project is to cost effectively address safety issues in the OR 42 corridor between mile posts 41.0 and 46.0

  3. Need • Crash rate is three times higher than state average for Rural Principal Arterial • Two Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) sites – east end of project: • Mile Post 45.02 to 45.19 • Mile Post 45.75 to 45.85 • Three fatal crashes (2004-2006)

  4. Need • Safety Investment Program (SIP) sites: • Mile Post 41.0 to 45.0 = Category Two • Mile Post 45.0 to 46.0 = Category Three • Category Three, Four, or Five are prioritiesfor safety improvement funding

  5. Total Crashes By Mile Post

  6. Crash Rate By Mile Post

  7. Crash History (2004-06)

  8. Need • Roadway geometry does not meet current design standards • At least 21 curves exceed the maximum degree of curvature for Rural Principal Arterial

  9. Existing Conditions

  10. Goals • Improve safety in the corridor for all users • Develop cost-effective solutions • Improve traffic flow (mobility) through the project area • Minimize impacts to environmental resources

  11. Improve safety in the corridor for all users • Remove substandard curves and roadway geometry • Improve sight distance • Increase shoulder width • Mitigate geohazards (rock fall and slides)

  12. Develop cost-effective solutions • Accommodate phased construction as funds are made available over time • Make use of the existing road and facilities where feasible

  13. Improve traffic flow (mobility) through the project area • Meet design standards • Meet projected travel demands for the vehicle types using the corridor for at least twenty years into the future • Reduce the number of locations with advisory speeds lower than the design speed

  14. Improve traffic flow (mobility) through the project area • Maintain access to adjacent properties • Provide passing opportunities • Minimize travel delays and detours during construction

  15. Minimize impacts to environmental resources • Avoid or minimize potential impacts to unstable slopes that increase the potential for slides • Avoid or minimize impacts to native species and their habitats including those listed or proposed for listing under the Endangered Species Act

  16. Minimize impacts to environmental resources • Avoid or minimize impacts to aquatic resources--which include the Middle Fork Coquille River, its floodplain and tributaries, and freshwater wetlands • Provide stormwater treatment and control

  17. Minimize impacts to environmental resources • Minimize impacts to mature riparian vegetation • Avoid impacts to archaeological, historic, and cultural resources

  18. All Options

  19. Questions?

More Related