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