HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 01 Franklin NEPA Project Update AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 4/15/2013
Meeting Type:Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.: Tom Boyatt/DPW
Staff Phone No: 541-744-3373
Estimated Time: 45 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
C I T Y C O U N C I L
Council Goals: Maintain and Improve
Infrastructure and
Facilities
ITEM TITLE: FRANKLIN NEPA (PROJECT) UPDATE
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Review project update information and provide staff direction regarding project
refinements and preparing the Federal prospectus for NEPA classification.
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
City’s consultant, URS Corp., has completed Phase 1 work assessing the Franklin
Blvd. concept in the Glenwood Refinement Plan. URS recommends, and staff
concur, that Phase 2 work include refined intersection design, realignment of the
facility to match existing center line, and a detailed environmental scan based on
updated design and alignment. This information will be used to prepare the Federal
Prospectus seeking NEPA classification from ODOT and FHWA (Federal Highway
Administration).
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1 – Communication Packet Memo from 4-8-2013
Attachment 2 – Current Franklin Corridor Envelope
Attachment 3 – Franklin Boulevard White Paper
Attachment 4 – Future Franklin Right of Way Centered on Existing Right of Way
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Council was provided with a Memorandum in last week’s Communication Packet
describing the current status of the Franklin NEPA project. The Communication
Packet Memo included a graphic of the existing Franklin Corridor Envelope, and a
white paper summarizing NEPA requirements and how the project might best
prepare for NEPA Classification. This AIS also includes a schematic of 175 feet of
Right of way centered on the existing right of way (Attachment 4) for comparison
purposes with the current Franklin Corridor Envelope, recognizing that the final
project footprint has not been set. At the work session staff will review and discuss
the issues identified in the Franklin Boulevard White Paper completed by the City’s
consultant. The key project issues revolve around project alignment, intersection
design and corridor mobility, and EmX integration into the project.
Staff proposes to work with URS to address the identified key issues in a Phase 2
work effort that will result in a draft Federal Prospectus ready to be submitted to
ODOT and FHWA. ODOT and FHWA will review of the Prospectus and use this
document to classify the project for NEPA purposes. While it is likely the project
will be classified as an Environmental Assessment (EA), staff believes it makes
sense to work with URS to refine level of design, alignment and EmX treatment to
determine if it is possible to seek a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under NEPA. The
work being contemplated in Phase 2 would be used in either an EA or CE process.
The NEPA project is funded by a total of $1.2 million in federal Surface
Transportation Program – Urban (STP-U), Urban Renewal District, City
Transportation SDC, and LTD funds.
M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield
Date: 4/8/2013
To: Gino Grimaldi COMMUNICATION
From: Tom Boyatt, DPW Community Development
Manager
Len Goodwin, DPW Director
PACKET
Subject: Franklin NEPA Update MEMORANDUM
INFORMATION SHARE:
The following information is provided to Council in advance of the April 15, 2013 work session
on the Franklin NEPA (Project) update. At the work session staff will review this information
with Council, answer questions, and seek a recommendation to move ahead to the next set of
tasks to advance the Project.
The concept for a Franklin Blvd. upgrade project was developed during the planning level study
completed in 2008. This multi-way boulevard/urban arterial hybrid concept was then carried
through the Glenwood Refinement Plan amendment process and adopted as part of the amended
Plan in 2012, including a “corridor envelope” that provides 25 extra feet of flexibility to locate
the new alignment – see Attachment 1, Franklin Corridor Envelope. Between 2008 and 2011
the City obtained funding for the required NEPA documentation from a combination of
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO, MPC), urban renewal, systems development charge,
and LTD resources. Staff is now working with consultants in the early stage of NEPA to
develop enough design, alignment and impacts detail to prepare for a submittal to ODOT and
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as part of the request for the Project’s NEPA
Classification. The Project’s NEPA classification will then dictate the level of effort necessary
to obtain federal NEPA approval.
The first goal for the Project in NEPA is to maintain the hybrid multi-way boulevard/urban
arterial design concept to support the ‘place making’ vision for the Glenwood Riverfront
District. The Franklin reconstruction project is a once in a lifetime opportunity to build high
quality infrastructure that will serve the Glenwood area, and the City, for decades to come. The
second goal is to work diligently to refine the Project design to minimize impacts to private
property as practical without sacrificing the qualities of the Project that will leverage community
reinvestment. One strategy here is to work with abutting property owners on the timing of the
access lane construction so that it can coincide with redevelopment of property fronting on
Franklin. The third goal heading into NEPA is to spend some time and effort at the front end of
the process to see if it is possible to get to the least costly and time consuming NEPA
classification while not sacrificing project elements that will be of a high benefit to Glenwood
and its redevelopment.
City and consultant staff have conducted a Project workshop to vet issues, and along with a fair
amount of follow up effort, have identified the next steps to be taken to best prepare for
interactions with ODOT and FHWA that will determine the Project’s NEPA classification.
Attachment 2 to this Memo is a URS white paper that provides a strategic overview of the
NEPA process and issues, and makes recommendations about work to accomplish in order to
complete the federal prospectus requesting a NEPA classification for the Project.
Attachment 1 – Page 1 of 2
MEMORANDUM 4/11/2013 Page 2
In general, the white paper recommends: realigning the center of proposed improvements to
widen equally on both sides of existing right-of-way; further design refinements for the four
intersections along the corridor (Glenwood Blvd., Henderson Ave., Mississippi Ave. and
McVey Hwy.); completing detailed environmental resource documentation (includes social
justice issues); and a look at how the width of the different design elements, like travel lanes,
can be reduced in an effort to avoid impacts. With this information in hand staff will be
prepared to return to Council and seek approval to forward the more detailed design to ODOT
and FHWA for NEPA classification consideration.
The three most important things for Council consideration based on the level of work completed
to date are the shifting of the Project’s centerline to match existing centerline, EmX treatments
in the corridor, and design treatment at the four traffic controlled intersections.
In the Franklin Study concept, the majority of the widening on Franklin was to occur to the
south of existing right of way as a means of preserving the maximum amount of land between
Franklin and the Willamette River for redevelopment. At this point, the City’s environmental
consultants are recommending against this approach due to the potential challenge of
disproportional impact under NEPA and because splitting the widening equally actually has the
potential to minimize overall impacts to buildings. Ultimately this approach will require an
amendment to the Glenwood Refinement Plan.
The treatment of EmX in the corridor and choice of intersection form are related issues. The
original Franklin concept included a roundabout at Franklin/McVey. What staff has discovered
is that including roundabouts at Mississippi, Henderson and Glenwood Blvd. creates significant
vehicular mobility throughout the corridor and over time. This vehicular mobility in turn makes
it unnecessary for at least 20 years, and possibly much longer, to run EmX vehicles in dedicated
guide-ways because traffic flow is such that there is no advantage to being in a dedicated
system. In addition, the design team has a concept to include EmX stations in the roundabouts
themselves, as depicted in Attachment 2, page 7 (note this graphic is for a location in Arizona).
This concept of exclusive EmX lanes and stations within the roundabout design also provides
the EmX vehicle a ‘queue jump’ of sorts to enter the intersections ahead of traffic entering in the
same direction. Further, by avoiding dedicated bus guide-ways for the foreseeable future, space
for future capacity improvements can be preserved as depicted on the draft cross sections on
pages 5 and 6 of Attachment 2. Preserving future capacity insures that the design can remain
flexible over time to add what may become needed, but cannot today be anticipated. Examples
of how future capacity could be used include additional vehicle lane capacity, capacity for
dedicated freight movement, capacity that could be used for additional bicycle and/or pedestrian
improvements, space for potential additional on street parking, or capacity for future EmX
dedicated guide-ways. The point is that by moving to roundabout intersections the project
maintains a much larger degree of flexibility to address the needs of the future that may not be
anticipated today, as well as increases vehicular mobility and improves safety.
Again, this is advance information for Council review and consideration prior to a discussion
with staff in work session on April 15th. At the work session, staff will be seeking direction on
intersection design and corridor alignment.
Attachment 1 – Page 2 of 2
01002004006008001000 Ft
184’
197’
151’
combined
“envelope”
184’ from N.
buffer line
197’ from N.
buffer line
151’ from N.
buffer line
Existing RoW
(parcel edge)20’ setback
from RoW
10’ from outer
sidewalk edge
Attachment 2 - Page 1 of 1
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 1
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 1 of 13
Franklin Boulevard: I-5 Bridge to McVay Highway Project
Strategic Overview
March 6, 2013
This white paper provides a strategic overview of the next steps for the Franklin Boulevard: I-5
Bridge to McVay Highway Project – in particular, how Springfield, the project sponsor, will
address the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements as implemented by the
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
and, potentially, the Federal Transit Administration1 (FTA). In particular, this paper outlines
how the City and project team will navigate the preliminary NEPA process to the point of
ODOT, FHWA and FTA classifying the project as either a Categorical Exclusion (CE), an
Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). While it is
ultimately the responsibility of the Federal lead agencies to determine a project’s NEPA
classification, the City of Springfield has expressed its intent to propose a project that would be
classified as a CE, if that project can meet local needs and expectations. This paper outlines a
strategic approach intended to try to achieve that goal. However, because Federal lead agencies
have relatively wide latitude in classifying a project – lead agencies must reasonably implement
the applicable NEPA and USDOT rules and regulations in doing so – it often cannot be certain
how they will classify a project without actually going through the process. This paper outlines
strategies for optimizing the likelihood of a CE classification, understanding the risks and
uncertainties inherent in that process.
1. NEPA Background
FHWA/ODOT and FTA use similar, but different, tools and processes to determine a project’s
NEPA classification (see Appendix A). However, they all use the same general standards in
making the class determination:
• A project is required to prepare an EIS when it has been determined that it has a high
likelihood of resulting in significant2 environmental impacts.
• In making a CE classification, the Federal lead agency has found that it is likely that the
proposed project will not result in significant environmental impacts3.
• When it is uncertain whether or not the project would result in significant environmental
impacts, the project is classified as an EA, which will be used to address that uncertainty. EAs
that determine that a project will have no significant impact conclude with a Finding of No
1 The project team expects that FTA’s level of involvement in the project will be largely determined on whether the
proposed NEPA project includes a relatively substantial BRT component and potential FTA funding. This white
paper assumes that FTA will play an active role in the project as a co-lead or cooperating agency. One potential
benefit would be that under MAP-21, FHWA may be able to use FTA’s rules for determining a CE classification.
Beyond that, the discussion included in this white paper is not sensitive to FTA’s ultimate level of involvement in
the project.
2 Under NEPA, a determination of whether an impact is significant or not takes into account context and intensity.
Context “means that the significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts … [and] varies with the
setting of the proposed action.” Intensity “refers to the severity of impact….” (40 CFR 1508.27)
3 According to 23 CFR 771.117, FHWA allows a CE classification for “actions that do not: induce significant
impacts to planned growth or land use for the area; require the relocation of significant numbers of people; have a
significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resource; involve significant air, noise, or
water quality impacts; have significant impacts on travel patterns; or otherwise, either individually or cumulatively,
have any significant environmental impacts.”
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 2
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 2 of 13
Significant Impact (FONSI); and those that conclude that the project would likely result in
significant environmental impacts prepare and publish an EIS, concluding with issuance of a
Record of Decision (ROD).
If a project enters into the NEPA classification step with likely significant environmental impacts
and/or uncertainty on whether there would be significant environmental impacts, the project
sponsor generally has two courses of action available to achieve a CE classification: 1) work to
avoid known significant impacts (which can include adequate avoidance and mitigation
measures); and 2) work to eliminate uncertainty about whether the project would result in
significant impacts.
In general, the first task is to change the project’s design/footprint to address known significant
impacts, again by either avoiding them or by minimizing and/or mitigating the impacts to the
point that they are no longer deemed significant. The second task, in general, is to increase the
level of certainty within the assessment of impacts (whether or not there is a likelihood of
significant impacts) by increasing the detail of the design of the project and/or the level of
environmental analysis. In general, this increased level of detail is applied to those areas where
there is uncertainty about the presence of significant impacts (e.g., conduct a noise analysis when
it is uncertain whether the project would result in severe noise impacts).
This paper examines how those two general strategies can be applied to the Franklin Boulevard
Project in a way that optimizes its chances of receiving a CE classification. Figure 1 illustrates
the project’s expected path to navigate the NEPA process using design refinement and additional
analysis to reach a CE classification. The path would take the project from a current preliminary
determination that there is some uncertainty on whether or not the project would result in
significant environmental impacts to a point where FHWA could conclude that the project would
not result in significant environmental impacts.
NEPA=National Environmental Policy Act; EA=environmental assessment; EIS=environmental impact statement; ROD=record of
decision; FONSI=finding of no significant impact; CE=categorical exclusion.
2. The Proposed Project
Based upon work performed for adoption of the Glenwood Refinement Plan, City staff have
initially defined the proposed project to be evaluated under NEPA. Most importantly, this
definition will determine the footprint of the project, which will largely dictate the project’s
range of environmental impacts (recognizing that operating characteristics of the project can also
result in impacts outside of the footprint of the project, e.g., noise or visual impacts). Section 3 of
this paper also outlines various measures that the City may consider to avoid, minimize or
mitigate impacts that would result from this initial definition of the project.
For this paper, the City has determined that the proposed project will be comprised of the
following primary components (see figures 2 through 4):
A. Revised Franklin Boulevard Cross Section
The proposed roadway improvements would result in a wider cross-section for Franklin
Boulevard, generally between I-5 and McVay Highway. East of Henderson Avenue, Franklin
Boulevard’s cross-section would be expanded from approximately 75 feet to approximately 175
feet; west of Henderson Avenue, Franklin Boulevard’s cross-section would be expanded from
approximately 75 feet to approximately 130 feet. The centerline of the new right-of-way cross-
section would be placed approximately at the centerline of the existing right-of-way.
The primary components making up the new cross section east of Henderson Avenue would
include (working from the center out in both directions (see Figure 3)):
o Center median – 16 feet
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 3
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 3 of 13
o Four through lanes – 48 feet (4x12 feet)
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 4
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 4 of 13
o Two bike lanes –12 feet (2x6 feet)
o Two outside median/planter strips – 34 feet (2x17 feet) – 11 feet of each median reserved for
future capacity
o Two parking access lanes –24 feet (2x12 feet)
o Two strips of on-street parking – 21 feet (14 feet diagonal on the north and 7 feet parallel on
the south)
o Two sidewalks –20 feet (2x10 feet)
The primary components making up the new cross section west of Henderson Avenue would
include (working from the center out in both directions (see Figure 4)):
o Center median – 16 feet
o Four through lanes – 48 feet (4x12 feet)
o Two bike lanes –12 feet (2x6 feet)
o Two outside median/planter strips reserved for future capacity – 22 feet (2x11 feet)
o Two sidewalks –20 feet (2x10 feet)
As a result of the modifications, Franklin Boulevard’s right-of-way would be 175 feet wide east
of Henderson Avenue and 108 feet wide west of Henderson Avenue (back of sidewalk to back of
sidewalk, with the development intent of a zero foot setback). Additional temporary construction
or permanent easements may be needed beyond the 175 and 108 feet if the new sidewalks do not
abut an existing building face when constructed.
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 5
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 5 of 13
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project P
White Pager on Strategic Approach
age 6
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 6 of 13
B. New Roundabouts
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 7
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 7 of 13
Four new roundabouts on Franklin Boulevard at Glenwood Boulevard, Henderson Avenue,
Mississippi Avenue, and McVay Highway that would connect the new alignment cross-
sections. The roundabouts would include connections to the existing streets intersecting
Franklin Boulevard and provide connections to future planned roads as described in the
Glenwood Refinement Plan. The roundabout concepts are to provide exclusive BRT lanes at
the roundabout, which would allow for BRT stations at three of the four roundabouts and a
BRT queue jump prior to each roundabout (See Figure 5) The cross sections and diameters of
the roundabouts (and thus their footprints) have not been determined and the eastern
roundabout could consist of a dual or “dog bone” roundabout.
Figure 5
Conceptual Roundabout and BRT Station and Queue Jump
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 8
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 8 of 13
C. Project Phasing
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 9
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 9 of 13
While the project may ultimately be constructed in phases, the description of the project would
not be phased for the purpose of the environmental documentation. If the full project is cleared
under NEPA, the City could advance any or all elements of the project into final design, right-of-
way acquisition and construction. However, if phasing were to occur there may be the need to
update the environmental process and documentation with at least a reevaluation.4
D. Consistency with the Glenwood Refinement Plan
The project’s current proposed roadway design is generally consistent with the roadway
improvements included within the Glenwood Refinement Plan. However, one inconsistency
in the roadway design is on the position of the proposed roadway’s cross-section relative to the
current roadway’s centerline. The plan has the roadway cross-section oriented so that the new
northern right-of-way line would be approximately 20 feet north of the current right-of-way line.
The new concept places the new centerline of the roadway in the same location as the centerline
of the existing right-of-way.
Included within the Glenwood Refinement Plan are other planned and potential roadway
improvements that are not considered part of the proposed Franklin Boulevard Project. For the
most part, these other roadway improvements are new or modified local streets that could
connect to Franklin Boulevard at a project roundabout or to the parallel parking access lanes. It is
the intent of the City to have this project’s NEPA process consider those planned and potential
roadway improvements as separate projects with independent utility. The planned and potential
roadway improvements would be addressed within this project’s NEPA document’s cumulative
impacts assessment, but impacts from those local streets would not be identified as impacts from
this project.
The City recognizes that the design of those planned and potential roadways may change as
properties within the refinement plan area are developed. Where reasonable and feasible, the
project would seek to accommodate connections between Franklin Boulevard and the planned
and potential roadways as future improvements, especially at the roundabouts. Until the
roundabouts are conceptually designed, it remains uncertain how the project design would
accommodate future connections to the new and modified local street grid.
3. Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation Measures
Once the proposed project elements described in Section 2 are conceptually designed, the design
of the project may be able to be modified by altering the project footprint to avoid known
impacts that could be deemed, either individually or collectively, as significant. Where impacts
cannot be avoided, the project would consider mitigation measures that could avoid a conclusion
that the remaining impact would be significant. In general, the focus of this effort would be to
4 Reevaluations are typically required by ODOT/FHWA if more than three years have passed since publication of
the NEPA document or if the definition of the project and its impacts or setting change substantially. Following are
examples of how a phased project or its setting could change: phasing of the project could require the construction
of temporary facilities outside of the project’s footprint that was initially cleared under NEPA; a building could be
constructed within the footprint of a subsequent phase of the project. FHWA and ODOT use a reevaluation to
determine if the prior NEPA document is still valid after the passage of time or with changes in the proposed project.
If the prior NEPA document is deemed valid, the project may proceed without the need to update the prior NEPA
document. If the prior NEPA document is not deemed valid, the project would need to prepare either a CE, EA or
EIS, based on the classification findings at that time. FTA has been known to only allow a phase of a project to
advance into final design and construction that was fully addressed in a final NEPA document.
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 10
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 10 of 13
avoid or minimize the displacement of buildings, off-street parking spaces and businesses, as
well as historic properties.
There are several general ways in which the project design, especially the segments of Franklin
Boulevard between the proposed roundabouts, could be altered to avoid or minimize impacts:
• At specific locations, adjust the new roadway’s centerline, moving it either north or south, to
avoid or minimize impacts. The alternation may introduce new curves into the roadway,
which would need to meet ODOT design standards or receive a design exception.
• Reduce lane and other widths in the cross section, such as reducing travel lanes to 11 feet
from 12 feet, reduce sidewalk widths or reduce the widths of median/park strips. These
reductions could be done either ubiquitously or on a site-specific level.
• Change the location of a feature, such as where the off-street parking and access road are
located.
• Move a particular roundabout north, south, east or west to avoid or minimize a particular
impact. However, because the roundabouts have yet to be designed at any level it is difficult
at this time to identify more specific avoidance or minimization measures for them.
4. Eliminating Uncertainty in the Identification of Significant Impacts
Currently, there is some uncertainty on the intensity of impacts due to the project and whether
they would be considered by ODOT/FHWA/FTA to be significant. Left unaddressed, this
uncertainty could prompt the agencies to classify the project as an EA, rather than a CE. This
uncertainty on the significance of impacts is generally due to three things: 1) uncertain design
and project footprint (e.g., the roundabouts); 2) important unknowns in baseline conditions (e.g.,
Section 106 status of several properties); 3) uncertainty about the need for key impact
assessments and their results (e.g., whether a noise analysis would be required and, if so, whether
there would be any severe noise impacts following the integration of feasible and reasonable
noise mitigation measures); and 4) the low resolution of existing aerial mapping and the absence
of reliable control points relative to design documents.
A. Increase Level of Design
Beyond the avoidance and minimization adjustments discussed in Section 3, there are three
primary areas of design that need to be increased in their level of detail: roundabouts, BRT
stations and queue bypass lanes; and adherence to design standards and incorporation of required
ancillary facilities.
Because the roundabouts are relatively large features, their design can affect their performance
(e.g., in meeting ODOT freight mobility standards) and they can affect the sizing and design of
the alignment segments, the City will need to invest time and effort in preparing a design for
each of the four roundabouts. These designs will need to accommodate truck and BRT flow, as
well as mainline and cross-street connections (including the ability to accommodate planned and
potential local streets). Further, they will need to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic.
Further, additional design work is needed to determine the footprint of the BRT stations and
queue bypass lanes. BRT stations and queue bypass lanes associated with the easternmost
roundabout will need to accommodate both the existing Franklin EmX line and the proposed
Main/McVay Line (between downtown Springfield and Lane Community College).
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 11
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 11 of 13
The alignment designs should be to a level that can demonstrate adherence to applicable design
standards in agreement with ODOT. The designs should also accommodate ancillary facilities,
such as are required for storm water treatment, lighting, utility poles, etc. Any required access
closures that would result in one or more business displacements should be identified. Finally,
any temporary (i.e., construction) or permanent (e.g., slope, maintenance) easements should be
mapped out.
B. Update Key Baseline Conditions
Several baseline conditions will be updated or confirmed to remove uncertainty about the
presence of protected resources, potentially including the following:
• Conduct or purchase aerial mapping suitable for conceptual design and the level of design and
analysis needed to reach a CE conclusion (inadequate mapping could lead to uncertainty on
the severity and number of impacts).
• Section 106 historic properties (addressing their boundaries, integrity and qualifying
characteristics – preferably with written concurrence between the OSHPO, ODOT and
FHWA.
• Section 4(f) and 6(f) resources (addressing their boundaries, public ownership, public
accessibility and qualifying characteristics)
• Adjacent sensitive receptors (to help determine if a noise analysis would be required) and
existing noise levels (if a noise analysis is required).
• Endangered species and their habitat (listed or candidate).
• Traffic counts with auto/truck splits (if a noise analysis is required).
• Demographic characteristics (for environmental justice compliance).
• Documentation of prior and planned public involvement activities, advisory committees and
decision-making processes (for environmental justice compliance).
• Off-street parking spaces (total within parcels that would have off-street parking spaces
removed).
• Business and building ownership (for all parcels adjacent to Franklin Boulevard).
C. Preliminary Assessment of Key Environmental Impacts.
A preliminary assessment will be made of key potential environmental impacts, including the
following (in general, the assessments would need to meet applicable ODOT/FHWA/FTA
standards):
• Determination of the project’s effect on eligible Section 106 historic properties (no effect,
effect but no adverse effect, adverse effect).
• Determination of the project’s use of Section 4(f) (and 6(f)) properties, including adversely
affected Section 106 resources (no use, constructive use, preliminary de minimis impact
finding).
• Noise analysis (if warranted) that would meet applicable ODOT/FHWA guidelines, including
consultation with ODOT noise staff on whether or not a noise analysis would be warranted.
• Determination of no effect for species in the project area, including informal consultation with
the ODOT liaison to NMFS to determine the level, if any, of consultation needed with NMFS
for ESA species in the Willamette River.
• Draft environmental justice assessment and determination, including documentation of the
project’s public involvement plan and decision-making process.
• Assessment of building, off-street parking and business displacements and relocations.
• Assessment of cumulative impacts of the project, especially relative to building and business
displacements and environmental justice.
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 12
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 12 of 13
5. How to Proceed Toward a NEPA Classification
Based on the City’s work to date, the following course of action will be taken to reach the point
where the City requests a NEPA classification of the project from ODOT and FHWA:
A. Prepare for Initial Meeting with ODOT/FHWA/FTA
• Update/verify baseline conditions as outlined in Section 4.B.
• Determine with ODOT noise staff whether a noise analysis would be required.
• Determine preliminary building and business displacements.
• Determine the sketch level design and footprint of the roundabouts.
• Outline approach and key messages
• Prepare a discussion draft of the Prospectus
• Prepare meeting material
B. Meet with ODOT/FHWA/FTA
• Discuss current sketch level project definition and key impacts (e.g., displacements)
• Discuss and agree on general approach
• Discuss justification for independent utility of first phase (if appropriate)
• Discuss justification of CE classification:
o Project is defined within the Glenwood Refinement Plan, which went through an
extensive public process.
o The business displacements due to the project would be small in number relative to the
new business that will come into Glenwood as a result of the City’s redevelopment
efforts – and no residents would be displaced.
o The project has and will continue to make substantial efforts to avoid, minimize and
mitigate adverse impacts.
• Determine key issues for ODOT/FHWA/FTA to be addressed in additional design
refinement, analysis and documentation.
• Determine schedule and process used to finalize the project’s classification.
• Determine FTA’s level of involvement and whether any other Federal agencies should be
engaged at this time.
C. Respond to ODOT/FHWA/FTA and Prepare Prospectus
• Adjust the work plan/approach as needed to address outcome of meeting with
ODOT/FHWA/FTA
• Conduct design refinement addressing elements in sections 4A and 3
• Prepare analysis and supporting documentation as described in Section 4.C
• Prepare draft and final of the Prospectus.
D. Submit the Prospectus for Final NEPA Classification
• Transmit draft Final Prospectus to ODOT/FHWA/FTA
• Meet with ODOT/FHWA/FTA to discuss Prospectus
• Receive comments on draft Final Prospectus from ODOT/FHWA/FTA
• Revise and submit Final Prospectus to ODOT/FHWA/FTA for final classification
E. Prepare Scope Schedule and Budget for CE Closeout Form Preparation
March 6, 2013 Franklin Boulevard Project Page 13
White Pager on Strategic Approach
ATTACHMENT 3, Page 13 of 13
6. Public Involvement
The project team will develop a public involvement strategy that will complement the project’s
technical and procedural work plan leading to NEPA classification of the project. That public
involvement plan will include three key elements: 1) continuing the City’s dialogue with the
affected community, especially communicating with stakeholders about how the project impacts
would change compared to those disclosed during the Glenwood Refinement Plan process;
2) integration of the team’s public involvement staff in the design refinement process used to
avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts of the proposed project; and 3) development of the public
involvement process used to support preparation of the project’s Categorical Exclusion
documentation (if the project is so classified by ODOT, FHWA and FTA).
175’ ROW CENTERED ABOUT EXISTING ROW