Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 1 Progress Report on the I-5 Willamette River Permanent Bridge Replacement Project AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: March 26, 2007 Meeting Type: Work Session Department: Development Services Staff Contact: Greg MottA'ft.\\.. S P R I N G FIE L D Staff Phone No: 726-3774 ---- rw C I T Y C 0 U N C I L Estimated Time: 25 Minutes ITEM TITLE: PROGRESS REPORT ON THE 1-5 WILLAMETTE RIVER PERMANENT BRIDGE REPLACMENT PROJECT ACTION REQUESTED: City staff and staff from the ODOT Bridge Delivery Unit will present a progress report on work-to-date and future events involving the 1-5 Willamette River permanent bridge replacement project. Council feedback on this presentation, including process and design option comments is sought. ISSUE STATEMENT: This very significant project has been progressing towards selecting conceptual design options for several months. Numerous factors contribute to this important decision-point, including functional needs of the system, cost, aesthetics, environmental compatibility and community values among others. Tonight's presentation will highlight the steps that have occurred, and are yet to come, in this project including the next key milestone, the Environmental Assessment. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Purpose and Need Statement, including Goals and Objectives 2. Talking points on costs, public involvement, bridge design process, OTIA III 3. PowerPoint materials of bridge construction design types 4. Project Schedule and Process Steps DISCUSSION/ FINANCIAL IMPACT: The ODOT Bridge Delivery Unit, with assistance from Oregon Bridge Delivery Partners (OBDP), is responsible for the Willamette River permanent bridge replacement project. The project is entering the final stages of the bridge design options selection process so that the Environmental Assessment (EA) phase may be undertaken. The design options are intended to address the purpose and need for the bridge and incorporate the Goals and Objectives articulated by the Citizens Advisory Committee, the Project Development Team (PDT), and comments from the public via a number of public outreach mechanisms (see Attachment 1, page 5 . Aesthetics, for example). A "build alternative" will be developed by the PDT that may include several "bridge type options" that fit within the environmental constraints on the project (The Council may wish to direct staff to schedule another update at this point to comment on the bridge type options). Once the "build alternative" is defined, it will become the basis for the EA that will be released for public comment, tentatively scheduled for this fall or early winter. At the conclusion of the public comment period the EA will be revised and published in . time for a public hearing, possibly in January 2008. The EA will be finalized with an expected "finding of no significant impact" issued (by Jupe 2008). Final engineering will follow and construction may begin as early as 2009. If signifi~ant impacts are identified, the process will switch to an Environmental Impact Statement evaluation and the timelines will change. 1.5 Willamette River Bridge Project Purpose and Need Statement Purpose of the Project The purpose of the proposed project is to improve safety and maintain connectivity and mobility for all users of Interstate 5 over the Willamette River in the Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan Area. Need for the P,roject The existing bridge has been decommissioned and the temporary detour bridge was not designed to withstand earthquakes. Currently average daily traffic (ADT) is about 49,000 vehicles on the interstate facility in the project area, and is prediCted to increase to roughly 73,000 ADT by 2030 (20-year design). The project is needed to meet state and federal safety and mobility policies. The existing interstate bridge is weight restricted and has been decommissioned so that heavy haul trucks must use the temporary detour structure built in 2004. . The detour structure does not meet current seismic standards and the construction methods used met environmental requirements only as they apply to temporary, not permanent, structures. The decommissioned bridge (constructed in 1962) is structurally deficient and cannot feasibly be repaired or widened to accommodate traffic flow and capacity for the projected traffic demand 20 years into the future. For those reasons, the bridge has been slated for replacement. The temporary detour structure was completed in 2004 to eliminate a 200-mile detour for heavy haul truck traffic caused by the overloading of the existing 1-5 bridge beyond applicable weight restrictions. The 200-mile truck detour represented an enormous economic impact to the state and region. An inspection of the existing bridge in 2002 found the bridge to be structurally deficient, with poor superstructure and poor substructure. The bridge is cracked in many places: longitudinally throughout the deck; near joints; in sides of box near bearings; in the web ends of the girders; and in the caps. In addition, it was designed to the bridge standards of the time that are no longer sufficient for today's freight movement. The bridge has a sufficiency rating of 20.00. Three primary factors make up a sufficiency rating: structural adequacy and safety; serviceability and functional obsolescence; and essentiality for public use. A sufficiency rating can not be less than 0 or greater than 100. A bridge qualifies for replacement funding from the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Funding Program if it has a sufficiency rating of less than 50. A rating of 51 to 80 only qualifies for repair funding. A structurally deficient bridge does not necessarily result in a sufficiency rating of less than 50. However, if a bridge is deemed structurally deficient, and has a sufficiency rating of less than 50, it has an increased likelihood of being selected for replacement. Table 1 provides>data from the February 2004 Bridge Inspection Report (2002 inspection) supporting the need for the project. State and federal rating guideline 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project ~ Pwposeand Need Statement - DRAFT ~A>tHMENT . ' .. f-1 Page 1 0/5 . . systems have been developed to aid in the inspection of br.idges. The National Bridge Inspection Standards (NB1S) are federal regulations establishing requirements for inspection procedures and reporting. A l-digit code on the federal Structure Inventory and Appraisal (S1&A) sheet indicates the condition of . the bridge elements. For the bridge rail, transitions, approach rail and rail ends, rating codes include 0 (does not meet standards or a safety feature is required) and 1 (meets current acceptable standards). For the deck, superstructure, and substructure, rating codes range from 9 to 0, where 9 is excellent condition, 7 is good condition some minor problems, 4 is poor condition, advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour, and 0 is ffliled condition. Based on a review of these and other factors in the bridge inspection report data, the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge is in need of replacement instead of being continually repaired and maintained. Replacing the cracked bridge with a new structure would greatly reduce the required regular maintenance costs; would provide greater public safety by using the most current design standards; and would decrease delays to the'traveling public due to less required maintenance with a new bridge. 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project PUlpose and Need Statement - DRAFT 02/06/07 1-2 Page 2 of5 Tablel- Bridge Evaluation Ratings andRemarks APPRAISAL NBI CATEGORY Ap'praisal Rating Category Rating ",,~_-=~'~<<<,__.<wh:"____'<<""=~"""-<<<<< """;::}-"::>-:,:~",-,,-,--,,/:>::: -, Bridge Rail@ :," :'_: ~'" - ::i-:'::'.;:;:--<...><.:<:-': -:",'_.:-: :':~:::-;:?~~:::-- :-: ;~:,'<;:--:~ o Does not nieelstandards, "",,,,-,""::f:__: ':":~.';:' Scour 5 Foundation stable/scour within ;,.:. .0DoesnOtmeet stahdafdsT), Approach Rail Rail Ends 1 Meets acceptable standards Channel CulverVRetaining Walls 8 Bank well vegetated N Not Applicable "',~,' t.,,". < '.-, ,,'.j."' n'-i-:'. Structural;! ,JM~~ts~~5~p~~~lesta.~d~rd~,p> ',.. ...,n; ~~asii:~H~iHt61~;abl~rJ~'lJiringWgl1 ~1~, ;;'pri6~ty:9f::fep..i.~~em.~,Dt:S;:~/>" --~;'<".'~~.-., \j:: :-::<-:< '0. <;~;:;_ ~,~'::,:- Deck Geometry 4 Meets minimum tolerable limits to be Waterway Approach Alignment 9 Superior to present desirable criteria 8 Equid to present desirable criteria Remarks Drains Deficienc Decks Box Flexural cracks in sides of box near bearings. Some minor spalling; on two occasions inspected inside box spans and found shear and flexural cracking 0.025" to 0.060"; between piers 3 & 4 there were at least Y, dozen 0.060" cracks in sides of box (could only access first 3 cells [no. west to east]); also moderate deflection in this span; installed crack au e in one location. Box Crack gauges on 9/12/02 read 0, 1 on the box reading and 0,-0.25 on the ca . PS Girders Caps Some crackin in the web ends of irders Some cracking in caps w/efflorescence and minor cracking under bearings. (Some cracks marked July 1971.) During 5-30-02 inspection inside box found 0.125" shear crack through pier 3 cap and utility hole (under southbound lane); installed au e. Several joints are spalling low & leaking. Inspected underside and top of deck, many' of the headers are breakin u . Joints 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project Purpose and Need Statement.-,- DRAFT 02/06/07 1-3 Page 3 of5 Draft Goals & Objectives (revjsed 2/2/07) The goals and objectives listed below for the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge project were developed after consulting the public, local jurisdictions, and resource and regulatory agencies. The goals and objectives"help ODOT identify and respond to key issues and concerns as the project is developed. " Transportation and Mobility Goal 1: Provide transportation facilities that complement and support State and local transportation systems and land use planning. ' . Objective lA: Meet Oregon Highway Plan mobility and access standards and policies for interstate highways to maintain an acceptable and reliable level of mobility now and in the future. . Objective lB: Accommodate transportation iinprovements planned for railroads, streets, highways, , interchanges, and bicycle/pedestrian paths in the area. . Objective lC: Provide a freeway bridge and potential associated roadway improvements that are safe and effective. . Objective 1 D: Maintain and where practicable enhance connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists during and after construction. . Objective lE: Keep bicycle paths open during construction and make them safe and compatible with long term usage. Natural Resources Goal 2: A void or minimize impacts to natural resources. . Objective 2A: Avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the Willamette River and its tributaries, Patterson Slough, riparian areas, upland native plant communities, and wetlands, and fish and wildlife in the area. . Objective 2B: Eliminate or minimize the number of bridge piers in the Willamette , River. ., Objective 2C: Minimize " adverse alterations to river hydraulics. . Objective 2D: Take advantage of practical opportunities to enhance habitats for native plants, fish, and wildlife. " ' . Objective 2E: Mitigate unavoidable impacts to the natural environment. 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project PUlpose and Need Statement - DRAFT 02/06/07 1-4 Page 40f5 Recreation Goal 3: Protect and enhance recr~ation resources and the recreational experience of users in the vicinity of the project. . Objective 3A: Protect and, as practical, enhance the pleasant pastoral character of the Whilamut Natural Area of Alton Baker Park (including Eastgate Woodlands Park). . Objective 3B: Maintain access to park facilities during construction and minimize adverse construction impacts to park users. . Objective 3C: Maintain or improve safety for river users. . Objective 3D: Take advantage of practical opportunities to enhance the park environment and further park planning goals. Aesthetics Goal 4: Provide an aesthetically pleasing solution that recognizes the scenic beauty and community significance of the project area. . Objective 4A: Design and construct a structure that can enhance the views from the river and surrounding areas. . Objective 4B: Design and construct an aesthetically pleasing structure that ~s a signature or landmark bridge -- a unique and special structure that represents the community . . Objective4C: Design and construct a structure that is aesthetically pleasing when viewed from th~ underside where most people will see it. Project Design, Construction, and Operation GoalS: Provide a sustainable, cost-effective solution that has performance durability during its expected design-life, minimizes construction impacts, and can be safely constructed and operated. . Objective SA: Minimize the impacts of construction staging and access disruptions on park users and neighborhoods. . Objective SB: Minimize noise impacts during construction and long-term operations. . Objective SC: Meet Oregori Freight Mobility Standards on I-S during construction by minimizing traffic delays and detours. . Objective 5D: Include design elements that discourage transient camping under the bridges. . Objective 5E: Design and construct an affordable, cost-effective project. . Objective SF: Provide a facility that is easily maintainable. . Objective 5G: Incorporate materials and construction techniques that allow for maintenance and sequential replacement of elements as needed to extend the lifespan of the structure. 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project Pwposeand Need Statement -DRAFT 02/06/07 ~ 1-5 Page 5 of 5 Willamette River Bridge - aesthetics expenditures Talking points by Oregon Bridge Delivery Unit March 5, 2007 Key messages . The Willamette River Bridge will cost approximately $180 million to replace. The money comes from two funding sources, a federal funding package called SAFETEA-LU (which stands for Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users) and a state funding package called the Oregon Transportation Investment Act, or OTIA. . The approximately $10 million allocated for aesthetics on the Willamette River Bridge came from the federal SAFETEA-LU funding package. This designated money creates the opportunity to build a bridge that is both functional and visually pleasing. . OOOT has allocated approximately $10 million, or 5.5 percent of the lotal, $180 million budget, to ensure that the Willamette River Bridge complements the beauty of its setting. Aesthetic elements will be incorporated holistically into the design of the bridge. Selection of the bridge type and aesthetic elements will be guided by input from community members and other stakeholders . The federally earmarked funds from SAFETEA-LU can.only be applied to bridges on Interstate 5. . The Willamette River Bridge is an important structure. OOOT will use available funds to build a structurally sound, sturdy bridge-the appearance of which reflects the community values and natural beauty of the Willamette Valley and the river. . To ensure the bridge reflects local community values, we have and will continue to conduct extensive community outreach to solicit input on the bridge design. The feedback we receive from community members is helping us develop the goals and priorities for the Willamette River Bridge project. March 5, 2007 1 A TT ACHMENT 2-1 . The bridge program involves more than repairing and replacing bridges; it is a transportation solution that reflects Oregon's values. Funding sources . ODOT has allocated approximately $10 million, or 5.5 percent of the total $180 million budget, to ensure that theWillamette River Bridge complements the beauty bf its setting. Aesthetic elements will be incorporated holistically into the design of the bridge. Selection of the bridge type and aesthetic elements will be gtlided byinput from community members and other stakeholders. . The majority of the money allocated for aesthetics, $8.8 million, was secured by Congressman Peter DeFazio under the Projects of National and Regional Significance Program established within the SAFETEA-LU funding package. The Willamette River Bridge project is one of 23 bridges on 1-5 that will receive funding from this federal source. . Sign~d into law Aug. 10, 2005, the SAFETEA-LU funding package authorized $286 billion in spending between 2004 and 2009 for surface transportation programs, such as highway, freight. safety and research. . The PNRS/SAFETEA-LUfunding created the opportunity to build a bridge that is visually pleasing as well as functional. . The Willamette River Bridge is a special structure that should reflect the community values and natural beauty of the Willamette Valley and the river. Built in 1962, the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge runs between the cities of Eugene and Springfield and provides a critical link in the iriterstate system for moving freight and people in the 1-5 corridor. Public involvement . ODOT's innovative decision-making fram,ework, called Context Sensitive and Sustainable Solutions, or CS3, is guiding the OTIA III State Bridge Delivery Program an~ work on the WiII~mette River Bridge. All stakeholders-businesses, communities, local officials and special-interest groups-are an integral part of the March 5, 2007 2-2 2 process, and their opinions are carefully considered in determining how the bridges will be designed and built. . ODOT has established two teams to guide the decision making process on this , project. The Community Advisory Group, made up of representatives of key community organizations, will provide input on community issues and concerns, bridge design and public involvement activities. The CAG meets monthly and serves as an advisory group to the Project Development Team. The PDT is made up of ODOT representatives, CAG members, and representatives from Lane County and the cities of Eugene and Springfield. The PDT meets on an as-needed basis, or approximately twice per month. . On the Willamette River Bridge, extensive public involvement activities have already begun to solicit feedback and answer questions. The public involvement activities on the Willamette River Bridge to date include: o Two public open house meetings, one in Springfield and one in Eugene (April 5, 2006) o One-on-one interviews with 23 representatives of stakeholder groups in Eugene and Springfield o Development of a project web page and public comment log o Establishment of a Citizens Advisory Group made up of key stakeholders (as of March 2, 2007, the CAG has met three times) o Establishment of a Project Development Team made up of ODOT representatives, CAG members, and representatives from Lane County and the cities of Eugene and Springfield. . ODOT will continue to solicit public input throughout the environmental assessment, I federal approval and design process. Two additional public open house meetings will take place this year, one in April and one in July. ODOT will use the feedback and information collected at these public open house meetings to guide the design of the Willamette River Bridge. Bridge design process . Work on the Willamette River Bridge is currently in the environmental assessment phase. This assessment will determine the most appropriate bridge type and identify March 5, 2007 3 2-3 any environmental impacts. We expect the environmental assessment to be complete in the summer of 2008. . After the environmental assessment, assuming no significant environmental impacts are identified and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is accepted by the Federal Highway Administration, the project will move into the design phase. . Visual Performance Standards have been developed for the bridge program. The VPS help bridge engineers. incorporate art and aesthetics into the math and science of bridge design. . ODOT has a legacy of building bridges that go beyond the ordinary and complement Oregon's unique natural be~lUty. For example, the Conde McCullough bridges along the coast serve as Oregon landmarks. . An example of successful community and stakeholder involvement is the Interstate" 84 Corridor Strategy document. Developed based on input from community members and stakeholders, the 1-84 Corridor Strategy provides the framework incorporating aesthetic elements into the design of bridge program projects in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. Cost-effective and efficient delivery practices . ODOT is committed to using cost-effective and efficient practices on all projects. Aesthetic considerations will be integral and essential to this project. . Aesthetics are incorporated into the bridge designs from the beginning using a holistic approach. In this way, aesthetic features are integral to the design. Aesthetics include basic forms such as curved structural members or arches, span lengths, pier spacing and shapes, and other elements. Additional aesthetic improvements, which could include color, texture and lighting, will also be integral and essentialto the bridge design. . The design of the Willamette River Bridge will consider possible future changes on Franklin Boulevard. The new bridge will be high enough and long enough to provide March 5, 2007 2-4 4 for additional lanes on Franklin Boulevard to ensure future development of Franklin Boulevard is not constrained. OTIA III State Bridge Delivery Program . The majority of the funding for the replacement ofthe Willamette River Bridge is provided by the third Oregon Transportation Investment Act, or OTIA III. The package included $1.3 billion to n~pair or replace more than 300 bridges on the state highway system. By developing projects that are sensitive to their communities and landscapes, the bridge program is leaving a lasting legacy and enhancing the quality of life for all Oregonians. The bridge program involves more than repairing and replacing bridges; it is a transportation solution that reflects Oregon's values. . The state's biggest public works project in a half-century will foster economic growth and commerce in Oregon for years to come. OOOT estimates that the bridge program will sustain an average of more than 3,500 jobsann.ually betw~en 2006 and 2010, and an annual average of 3,000 jobs over the life of the bridge program. . In delivering the bridge program, OOOT is achieving five interrelated program goals: maintaining mobility and safety; stimulating Oregon's economy; fostering workforce growth and development; engaging stakeholders to meet community needs and ensuring environmental stewardship; and promoting cost-effective decision-making. ### March 5, 2007 2-5 5 )> ~ ~ )> (') :I: :s: m 2" ~' w ,r- The OTIA III State Bridge De.livery Pro,grantu,n.d th 'ILl ]:.-'111"" t" f" R'. B'" -"d" i'~" ,e rirtl" ,!ame< i,e .' ./tv'e'r' .,~M,iigie ; I J I. , ,r- PURPOSE AND NEED FOR. PROJECT · Improve safety and maintain connectivity and mobility for all users of 1-5 over the Willamette River in the Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan Area · Replace the existing 1-5 bridge' · Remove the existing detour bridge PUBLIC INVOLEMENT · Context Sensitive and Sustainable Solutions · Engage- the general public through a variety of methods · Formation of a Community Advisory Group (Jan. 2007) · Prepa'ration of an Environmental Assessment (Dec. 2007) · Presentations to Stakeholders Groups (Ongoing) ,r- COMM-UNITY ADiVISOR.YGROUP' · Identify issues · Pr9_v~ide input on community values relative to the project · Assist Project Development Team in development of goals and objectives and evaluation criteria · Provide input on environmental issues and design elements such as bridge type and landscaping PROCESS' · Identify key issues · Develop goals and objectives and evaluation criteria · Identify options <we are here · Evaluate impacts · Identify build alternative · Complete environmental assessment process · Design · Construction o KEY ISSUES . Cost · Clearances over Franklin Blvd and the railroad · Aesthetics · Impacts on parks and natural areas · Impacts on trails and recreation · Noise and impacts to neighborhoods · Impacts on water quality, fish habitat · Impacts on archeology and historical resources · Unique setting and proximity to Willamette River and the park · High public interest in how the bridge looks · Three important views: autos on 1-5 and Franklin, from the cities, and close-up from bike, foot and river · Consider a broad range of bridge types: fit. community values and the natural beauty of the Willamette Valley and the river SCHE ULE Scoping/Refine 2006 Process . Goals, Objectives and Winter 2006 - Spring 2007 Evaluation Criteria Develop Range of Alternatives ~ We are here Spring 2007 Evaluate &. Refine Alternatives Spring/Summer 2007 Prepare Draft EA Summer/Fall 2007 Public Review/Hearings I December 2007 1 Revised EA/FHWA Approval June 2008 Final Design/Permitting I 2008-2009 Construction 2010-2012 1t' CONTACT INFORMATION" · Jamie Damon, CAG Coordinator (OBDP) 503-235-5881 · Tim Dodson, ODOT Project Liaison 503-986-3311 · Ann Sanders, ODOT Project Leader Area 2 541- 744-8080 71" · Joe Harwood, ODOT Public Information Officer 541-726-2442 · OBDP Website: .bttp://www.obdp.orgL · Willamette River Bridge Website: www .oregon .gov /ODOT /HWY /REGION2/I -5WRB.shtml UVA.L,UATION OFf BRIDGE TYPES · Meets purpose and need for the project · Consideration of public input · Application of evaluation criteria · Within project budget l~~ Gr,- d1 fe- i t". t. D'~" th') r ~ l _~~ _,~_. r ~l ~ ~ ,--" - ,j ~ .. ~ { I ~ r _ - t'- ~' r' I- f ,"" ~ F } 1 { =- ~ r 'I ~ l __."~Jlr ~~-ers ", .~on_s ~a-n ~ ~_-~ep, ",,1=:_.) ,,. ,tt J~ Ge~ '~di ('"IJ! hi dr' R'. d' ., / -, rJt,. ~"lers !.i-:li aunc ( ie r_~) - " / ~~en r ~~er1.ng ,r- Box Girders (Haunched) . ~ 7(' Be GI. d' ~C-! t tn th'\ ,.':OX (j~lr~iers \.llj"ons"ran'{ "1_,'ep"J:T}:) .th' Y'8F 'h" d ~ R' dl · WI iJiI ~ .~' I ~~ape ~! .c~I.ers - _I' ".en {lerlng ,r- B" ~o' :'U G. i':'Mid- ?n~s ('?"IUIU'H'ne' hadr/\ _! ~'4~_IC..r ~ ~ ~:~.r ~. ~'.J:~"I = 1 !, ~, r L ~ I Id = 1.J! -thi v".es,lh' d' Pi". " R" d · - ri ""' ~ f' j l rr [I ...-- If' ~ J _'. r "J -,' _ " --~ 'f ~' .. ' 'T ~ r_l^ ~r' - V J r J ,I 'I 1,lrll~,-~ I' ~",,, - / ~ II.-""V 1 1'1 WI _, y ~ If ,.,j 1 _>~pe _, _" ,~.ers "". . en, =~e"n9 7tt Box with Below Jeck Arch 71" Haunched Box with Rectangular Piers JrorCf1On J1 Dop:urmont of Transportation 1-5 - Willamette River Crossing ~ Clf9CIlII:ridgt~~ Haunched Box with Rectangular Piers View From Under Bridge 1-5 - Willamette River Crossing 7t' ~ ~~cIeIiftl)oplMdt" Box with V Piers - 2 Box with V Piers - 3 Span . ....~~ '_'".:.,{~J.. ''''; /" ---'.,'~,j '-, ~ JrO,ogon DO/Ulr'ment of TUJnsportarJon I-S - Willamette River Crossing ~ ~bd.t;!e~pItltlm" V Piers View From Under Bridge Jr0orogon '11 Doportmonr 01 TransportatIon 1-5 - Willamette River Crossing ,r- ~ ~~ddIwf)ptI'lI'Im' 71" '" Arch Below Deck Before and After Views .\h~~ ~~~~ ~jj;jth~Urllf1lTl~ or-tQOO~tdclfterr~ U:i1mn~1t'(f ~1il\mrcGw~ {~i<1'f1~iOJ~ Jror.gon JJ Doportmonr 01 Trnn$poltar/an 1-5 - Willamette River Crossing :!!l Q!p~OItrtr,pItD'Im" Arch Below Deck View From Under Bridge ]rO,,,gon Deportmont 01 TIlJn$portaflon 1-5 - Willamette River Crossing 7~ ~ <lMJ'lll~dIIIwf)'~ ,r- PR.OJECT1COST & FUN fNG SOURCES · $70 million for the bridge structure crossing the. river, railroad, Franklin Blvd and the park · $110 million additional cost includes: 'engineering, demolition, road work, other structures, and ties to existing transportation system ~ unavoidable costs Funding comes from: ~ SAFETEA-LU (Federal funding) $30 million ~ OTIA III (Oregon Transportation Investment Act) $150 million 71" BRIDGE) TYPES EVAL, rtl.TEDIAND BEING CONSIDERED · I-Girders · Box Girders · Haunched Box Girders · Arch (Below Deck) · Above Deck Arch (One span combined with girders) BRIDGE TYPES EVALUATED BUT EXCEED PROJECT BUDGET · Cable Stayed · Above Deck Arch (Multiple Spans) · Suspension 7" SU~ f'lIIMAR" r y- ." . ; i.l.tf~... I" ' , .1J~!.1 'I.~; _r~ "7. _. ( · ODOT is working with the community to identify issues, goals and objectives, and criteria using a Context Sensitive and Sustainable Solutions Approach · Bridge options are being identified and evaluated · Focus is on the highest value option that addresses community concerns _ Oec 06 to Jan 07 Feb-07 . Technical Team: . Oevelop initial bridge type options . Denne project parameters - Draft Goals and Objectives and evaluation crileria Technical Team: . Refine bridge type options . Revise Goals and Objectives, develop evaluation criteria, and saeen opboos CAG'l Jan. 8 ~ PDTll Jan.t2 . Partnering Session: roles. expectations. protocols . Tectmical coordination PDT ~2 Jan. 19 -Issues discussion . Review Purpose and Need -Initial bridge type options CAG ~2 Jan. 31 CAG~3 Feb 19.23 1-5 Willamelle River Bridge Project (Eugene/Springfield) Project Schedule and Process Steps 1/17/2007 - Review draft. GoaIsIObjectives and eva!. criteria -ProjectCOllstraints . Initial bridge type options . Select view points for visuallenderings . Finalize Goalsl Objectives and eva!. criteria - Bridge options discussiOll MarloA r.07'" ~:,:: .~ : ',::: -. . ... ...., -," '-. . . Nov.o7l0' j.n-08' ,. ,_'.' .. T ...... ... ......\ '--. , , . Feb.08 10 Jun-08.. '. ==i==l===l== PDlI3 Feb2 PDTIU Feb. 19.23 M. -07 . Technical Team: . Refine bridge type options . Finalize Goals and Obje~tives and evaluation criteria . Develop materials flY Open House #2 - Technical Team: . . Develop/refine build alternative Technical Team: - Analysis of build alternative - Oevelop Draft EA - Begin Preparation 01 Concept Plans of Build All T echnl,,1 Team: . Revise and publish EA Technical Team: - Respood ID commenls. finalize EA. and prepare Recad 01 Decision - Review draft Goals/Objectives and eval. critena - Bridge options discussion -FinalizeGoalsI Objectives and evat criteria - Bridge options diswssioo CAG Mar.s.g CAGII6 Jan 08 CAGIU MayJ.11 CAG'5 Sepl,?ctOl "RevUiw Draft EA -Reviewleedbadl. from Public Hearing - Recomm's for FinalEA . Initial evaluation of blidge options .Seleclbridge options to present at open house . Rsview feedback from Open House 112 - Final evaluation and recomm on bridge type! build allemative (Of EA PDlI5 PDlI6 PDlI7 PDTl8 PDlI9 PDTlIO Mar.5.g May Jul OctlNov Jan.GB Mar. 08 . tnitialavatuation -Review .T_ . T ed1nleal . Review -FinatizeEA 01 bridge options feedback from issueslEA issueslEA -- . Select bridge Open House #2 preparation preparation f'1.JbIicHearing options to present -Identify Build and CAG at open house AUemative(s) for . meeting EA -FinalizaEA -j 8RIEFtNG of LOCAL JURISDICTIONS Jan/Feb -Introductory Briefing ... - ~. -. -.1- II OUTREACH III :. Mar. 12-Apr.6 : . . . . ------r~: . Newsletter #2 ~ -r;; -Media:press 11'-"- :===1: re!ease. If =====r.: newspaper ads. : II etectrooicartides: . . ...........~,_..._-_.- BRIEFING of LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AprJMay . informational: present build allemativa PUBLIC HEARING Oec.Jan -Bridgeoplions end public feedback :i':" '1::' .;V,qJ~~~fI~~ftefi~~!\l~erp~Hveli." ,:.;:: - ::., " ~,' fr~P~r~Prflft,inVin;nme!1t~1 ':__ ;."', ~~s~5s/lJ.e!1k~ "..' '.' ,l , F'. \ ,.' .' -..:'"'' . ;.'.. >" ----h CAG co Community Advlsmy Group PDT co ProJec.t Development Team