Report Title

Document Sample
Report Title Powered By Docstoc
					                                     DRAFT



Planning and Land Use
Technical Report
Weaver Road Extension Project




January 22, 2008



Prepared by: John Kelly, URS Corporation
                                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ 1
      S.l  Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1
      S.2 Affected Environment ......................................................................................................... 2
      S.3 Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................. 3
1.   INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................ 13
      1.2 Purpose of the Project ....................................................................................................... 13
      1.3 Need for the Project .......................................................................................................... 13
      1.4 Alternatives Considered .................................................................................................... 15
      1.5 No-Build Alternative ........................................................................................................ 16
      1.6 Build Alternative ............................................................................................................... 17
2.    METHODS ................................................................................................................................. 19
      2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 19
      2.2 Related Federal, State and Local Regulations .................................................................. 19
      2.3 Methods............................................................................................................................. 19
3.    AGENCY COORDINATION AND INVOLVEMENT ......................................................... 23
      3.1 Federal............................................................................................................................... 23
      3.2 State................................................................................................................................... 23
      3.3 Local ................................................................................................................................. 23
4.    AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................ 25
      4.1 Existing and Planned Land Use ........................................................................................ 25
      4.2 Applicable Plans and Policies ........................................................................................... 39
5.    ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ............................................................................... 47
      5.1 Direct Effects .................................................................................................................... 47
      5.2 Indirect Effects .................................................................................................................. 48
      5.3 Cumulative Effects............................................................................................................ 50
      5.4 Construction Effects.......................................................................................................... 50
      5.5 Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies .............................................................. 50
6.    POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................ 59
7.    PERMIT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................... 61
8.    REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 62




January 22, 2008            DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                                            i
                                                                    TABLES

     Table 5-1 Land Converted to Roadway Use by Existing Use .......................................................47
     Table 5-2 Land Converted to Roadway Use by Comprehensive Plan Designation ......................48
     Table 5-3 Land Converted to Roadway Use by Zoning ................................................................48


                                                                   FIGURES

     Figure 1-1 Wide Range of Alternatives .........................................................................................16
     Figure 1-2 Build Alternative ..........................................................................................................18
     Figure 2-1 Project Area and Location Map ...................................................................................20
     Figure 4-1 Land Use ......................................................................................................................26
     Figure 4-2 Comprehensive Plan Designations ...............................................................................28
     Figure 4-3 Zoning ..........................................................................................................................33
     Figure 4-4 Overlay Zones ..............................................................................................................37

                                                                APPENDICES

     Appendix           Memorandum on “Zoning and Land Use Designations Applicable to the Weaver
                        Road Bridge (Exist 106) Project,” September 4, 2007




ii      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                                         January 22, 2008
  S. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

  S.l Introduction
  The Weaver Road Extension Project would connect the Weaver Road Interchange (Exit 106) on
  Interstate 5 south of Roseburg in Douglas County to Old Highway 99 in the Tri City area south of
  Myrtle Creek, Oregon, crossing the South Umpqua River. The purpose of the project is to enhance
  transportation connections, safety, and freight mobility to and within Myrtle Creek, Tri City, and
  adjacent communities. The need for the project arises from traffic safety problems at the
  interchanges to the north and south of the Weaver Road Interchange and on Old Highway 99; limited
  connectivity between Interstate 5 and Myrtle Creek and Tri City areas; and projected growth in
  traffic and congestion along Old Highway 99. The proposed Build Alternative was selected from
  among a wide range of alternatives. It would connect to Old Highway 99 in the vicinity of Wecks
  Road. It would include one motor vehicle lane in each direction, with a left turn lane at Old Highway
  99. The shoulders would be wide enough to accommodate pedestrians and bicycles and the
  construction of sidewalks in the future. Wecks Road would be realigned to meet Old Highway 99 at
  an angle of approximately 90 degree. Old Highway 99 would be reconstructed to the north and south
  of the intersection to include sidewalks and bike lanes. A traffic signal would be placed at the
  intersection of the extension, Old Highway 99, and Wecks Road. The intersection of Aviation Drive
  with Weaver Road would be moved east.

  Land use on the east side of the South Umpqua River, where most land use impacts would occur, is
  primarily urban residential, with commercial uses near the intersection of Old Highway 99 and
  Wecks Road and dispersed agricultural uses in the area. This is similar to what the comprehensive
  plan and zoning call for. Table S-1 summarizes how the No-Build and Build Alternatives compare in
  terms of planning and land use.

                        Table S-1: Comparison and No-Build and Build Alternatives
                                           No-Build
                                          Alternative                      Build Alternative
Land converted to roadway use         0                 4 acres
Changes in land use encouraged        None            More infill development near project east of Old
                                                        Highway 99
                                                      Limited conversion of land to commercial use
                                                      Possible redevelopment of existing commercial
                                                        properties
Cumulative land use effects           None           No discernable effects
Construction effects                  None           None
Need for exception to Statewide       Not applicable Not needed
Planning Goal
Action needed to comply with State    Not applicable No action needed
Agency Coordination Program
Consistency with Oregon               Not applicable Consistent
Transportation Plan
Consistency with 1999 Oregon          Not applicable Consistent
Highway Plan




  January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report         1
                        Table S-1: Comparison and No-Build and Build Alternatives
                                          No-Build
                                         Alternative                        Build Alternative
Consistency with Interchange Area     Inconsistent     Consistent
Management Plan, Interstate 5
Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road), 106
(Weaver Road), and 108 (Myrtle
Creek)
Consistency with Oregon Bicycle and   Not applicable Consistent
Pedestrian Plan
Consistency with Oregon Aviation      Not applicable Consistent
Plan
Consistency with Douglas County       Inconsistent     Consistent
Transportation System Plan

  S.2 Affected Environment
  Existing Land Use. Figure 4-1 shows existing land use in the Land Use Study Area (LUSA), which
  is where most indirect land use impacts would occur. As the figure shows, land use on the west side
  of the South Umpqua River is a mix of low density residential and agriculture, and also includes a
  small airport and adjoining vacant land. Land on the east side of the river is urbanized and mainly
  residential, but with scattered commercial uses along Old Highway 99 and some dispersed vacant
  land. Land between the river and Old Highway 99 north of the proposed alignment is primarily in
  agricultural use.

  Comprehensive Plan Designations. Figure 4-2 shows comprehensive plan designations in the
  LUSA. Most of the LUSA on the east side of the South Umpqua River is within what the Douglas
  County Comprehensive Plan calls the “Tri City Urban Unincorporated Area” (UUA). Within the
  LUSA, the Myrtle Creek city limits include only the Municipal Airport, a corridor containing Old
  Highway 99 between the airport and the main Myrtle Creek city limits, and recently-annexed land in
  the LUSA’s northeast corner. The land parcels shown on Figure 4-2 as tribal lands are owned in trust
  for the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians. As such, they are exempt from County
  planning and zoning laws.

  Zoning. Figure 4-3 shows zoning in the LUSA. Figure 4-4 shows overlay zones. Floodplain Overlay
  zone regulations require permits for the construction of structures within the FP zone. Permit
  requirements are intended to “minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions.”

  Applicable Plans and Policies. Applicable plans and policies are the following. See the
  environmental consequences section for relevant provisions.

     Statewide Planning Goals and Transportation Planning Rule
     State Agency Coordination Program
     Oregon Transportation Plan
     1999 Oregon Highway Plan
     Interchange Area Management Plan, Interstate 5 Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road), 106 (Weaver
      Road), and 108 (Myrtle Creek)
     Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
     Oregon Aviation Plan
     Douglas County Comprehensive Plan

  2     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report            January 22, 2008
S.3 Environmental Consequences

S.3.1 Direct Effects
The No-Build Alternative would have no direct effects, which are defined as the conversion of land
from its existing use to roadway use. The Build Alternative would convert 4 acres from its present
use to roadway use. Tables S-2, S-3, and S-4 show the existing use, comprehensive plan
designations, and zoning of the 4 acres. The land listed as “not subject to comprehensive plan” in
Table S-3 and “not subject to zoning” in Table S-4 is the land owned in trust for the Cow Creek
Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians. As stated on page S-2, these lands are not subject to the
Douglas County Comprehensive Plan or County zoning.

                       Table S-2: Land Converted to Roadway Use by Existing Use
                                                (acres)
            Use                           No-Build Alternative                 Build Alternative
            Residential                             0                                1.86
            Commercial                              0                                2.04
            Agricultural                            0                                0.10
                              Total                 0                                 4.0
            Source: MB&G, January 2008.




           Table S-3: Land Converted to Roadway Use by Comprehensive Plan Designation
                                             (acres)
          Use                                           No-Build Alternative        Build Alternative
          Low Density Residential                                0                          0.83
          Medium Density Residential                             0                          1.03
          Tourist Commercial                                     0                          0.12
          Community Commercial                                   0                          1.91
          Limited Commercial                                     0                          0.01
          Not Subject to Comprehensive Plan                      0                          0.10
                                        Total                    0                           4.0
          Source: MB&G, January 2008.


                           Table S-4: Land Converted to Roadway Use by Zoning
                                                 (acres)
          Use                                           No-Build Alternative        Build Alternative
          Suburban Residential                                   0                          0.83
          Single-Family Residential                              0                          1.03
          Tourist Commercial                                     0                          0.12
          Community Commercial                                   0                          1.91
          Not Subject to Zoning                                  0                          0.10
                                            Total                0                           4.0
          Source: MB&G, January 2008.




January 22, 2008    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        3
S.3.2 Indirect Effects
Indirect land use effects are changes in land use that highway projects encourage by altering travel
times to and from areas, altering property access, and changing traffic volumes. The No-Build
Alternative would have no indirect land use effects. The Build Alternative would:

   likely increase the amount of infill residential development in the portion of the LUSA east of
    Old Highway 99, compared to the No-Build Alternative, but not greatly. Highway projects affect
    residential development primarily by reducing travel time to employment centers. Roseburg is
    the largest employment center in the labor market of which the project area is part. The project
    would reduce travel time between Roseburg and the intersection of Old Highway 99 and Wecks
    Road only modestly. Comparison of a map of existing land use and a zoning map on indicates
    capacity for substantial amounts of additional residential development, which would be
    consistent with applicable plans and zoning. Residential development beyond the existing UGB
    unlikely because of this capacity, capacity for additional residential development in the Tri City
    area outside the LUSA, restrictions on the expansion of UGBs in Oregon, and restrictions on
    residential development outside UGBs.

   result in only limited conversion of land to commercial use. On the west side of the river, it
    would make the tribal trust land more attractive for commercial development because it would be
    directly accessible from the Tri City area, as well as from Interstate 5. However, this land already
    has direct access from Interstate 5 and its location in a floodplain would make it more expensive
    to develop and more difficult to finance than development outside a floodplain. On the east side
    of the river, the Build Alternative would make the small amount of vacant commercially-zoned
    land near the intersection of Old Highway 99 and Wecks Road more likely to be developed or
    accelerate its development, compared to the No-Build Alternative. Other than these
    consequences, its effect would be limited because:

    o      The land zoned for commercial development on the east side of the river lacks the
           proximity to and visibility from Interstate 5 that would make it attractive for development
           that relies on easy access from the Interstate.
    o      The Floodplain Overlay zone would deter development. It would add development expense
           and make securing financing more difficult.
    o      The amount of land zoned for commercial use is too small to accommodate any substantial
           commercial development, such as a motel.
    o      Expansion of the area zoned for commercial development is constrained by adjoining
           residential uses because residents often resist expansion of adjoining commercial zoning.

   likely foster the redevelopment of some existing commercial properties. Project improvements,
    especially the traffic signal at the intersection of the Weaver Road Extension and Old Highway
    99 and the sidewalks, bike lane, and median on Old Highway 99, would make the commercially-
    zoned land near the intersection more attractive for redevelopment. Elevated traffic volumes
    would increase the attractiveness for retail uses. In particular, the project could make financially
    feasible the redevelopment of the land occupied by the dated structures on the east side of Old
    Highway 99 and by the RV park, even considering the extra costs associated with being in the
    Floodplain Overlay zone. However, for these effects to occur, property owners have to either be
    motivated and financially able to undertake redevelopment or sell to buyers who are.




4       DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report     January 22, 2008
S.3.3 Cumulative Effects
The No-Build Alternative would have no cumulative effects. The Build Alternative would have no
discernable cumulative effects. The “past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions,” in
combination with which the Build Alternative would have cumulative effects, are the other on-going
and planned transportation projects listed in the description of the No-Build Alternative. These are
mainly bridge replacements in the general area and street construction projects elsewhere in the Tri
City area, outside the LUSA. As such, none of the projects would alter access to, traffic volumes in,
or transportation improvements in the LUSA.

S.3.4 Construction Effects
The construction of the Build Alternative is unlikely to have a long-term impact on land uses.
Construction impacts such as access changes and detours would impose short-term impacts on
businesses and residents, but those impacts would be temporary, lasting no longer than the duration
of construction. Construction staging areas would temporarily use some land in the LUSA, but the
land would be available for its allowed use after the completion of the project.

S.3.5 Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies

Statewide Planning Goals and Transportation Planning Rule
Once the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) has “acknowledged”
city and county comprehensive plans as consistent with the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals, the
goals do not apply directly to projects such as the Weaver Road Extension. Because LCDC has
acknowledged both the Douglas County and Myrtle Creek comprehensive plans, the Statewide
Planning Goals do not apply directly to the Project. Nonetheless, the LCDC administrative rules
implementing Goal 12, Transportation, known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), specify
when an “exception” to Goal 12 is necessary for a highway improvement. Oregon Administrative
Rule (OAR) 660-012-0065 lists transportation improvements allowed on rural lands. OAR 660-012-
0070 requires an exception to Goal 12 for transportation projects that are not included within 660-
012-0065 and specifies the conditions such exceptions must meet.

The Statewide Planning Goals do not apply to the project. The goals would apply only if Douglas
County had to amend its comprehensive plan to make the project consistent with it, or if the TPR
required a goal exception for it. As explained below, the project is consistent with Douglas County’s
Transportation System Plan. The TPR does not require a goal exception because the project is not
located on rural lands subject to the Statewide Planning Program. On the west side of the river, it
crosses land owned in trust for the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians. Such lands are
outside the jurisdiction of the Statewide Planning Program. On the east side of the river, the project
is located within the UGB.1 The property boundary of the tribal trust land extends to the middle of
the South Umpqua River from the west2 and the UGB also follows the middle of the river. Therefore,
the project does not enter rural “land,” even over the river. See the appendix.



1
  As proposed, an easement for inspection and maintenance on the north side of the extension would extend about 15 feet
outside the UGB, into rural lands. However, no physical improvements would occupy this land and ownership of the
affected land would remain unchanged. Therefore, it is understood that the easement would not trigger the need for a
goal exception of the type referenced on page 39.
2
  The State of Oregon does not consider the land under the South Umpqua River to be publicly-owned, because it is not
navigable. See http://www.oregon.gov/DSL/NAV/navigwaterways.shtml.

January 22, 2008     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                     5
State Agency Coordination Program
Statewide Planning Program law requires ODOT and other state agencies to carry out their duties “in
a manner compatible with” local comprehensive plans and land use regulations (OAR 731-015-
0075(3)). In addition, they are required to have policies to coordinate with other agencies and local
governments in the performance of their duties under the Statewide Planning Program. ODOT
implemented these requirements as applied to projects like the Weaver Road Extension by adopting
an administrative rule, referred to as ODOT’s State Agency Coordination Program. It states that
ODOT will rely upon affected cities and counties:

    to make all plan amendments and zone changes necessary to achieve compliance with the
    statewide planning goals and compatibility with local comprehensive plans after completion of
    the Draft Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment and before completion
    of the Final Environmental Impact Statement or Revised Environmental Assessment. These shall
    include the adoption of general and specific plan provisions necessary to address applicable
    statewide planning goals. (OAR 731-015-0075(3))

As stated above, the project would require neither the amendment of Douglas County’s
comprehensive plan to be consistent with it nor an exception to Statewide Planning Goals. No
amendments to the Douglas County Land Use and Development Ordinance are required. Therefore,
ODOT may issue a revised environmental assessment in compliance with ODOT’s State Agency
Coordination Program.

Oregon Transportation Plan
Applicable policies and why the Build Alternative meets them follow:

       Policy 2.1 – Capacity and Operational Efficiency. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
       manage the transportation system to improve its capacity and operational efficiency for the
       long term benefit of people and goods movement.

    The Build Alternative would improve the transportation system’s capacity and operational
    efficiency by:

          enabling the use of Old Highway 99 in instances where Interstate 5 is blocked between
           Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) and either Interchange 103 (Riddle Road) or Interchange
           108 (Myrtle Creek) and by reducing out-of-direction travel between Interstate 5 and the
           LUSA.
          causing intersections to meet ODOT and Douglas County mobility standards, which
           would not meet the standards under the No-Build Alternative (see the Traffic and Safety
           Technical Report).

       Policy 4.1 – Environmentally Responsible Transportation System. It is the policy of the State
       of Oregon to provide a transportation system that is environmentally responsible and
       encourages conservation and protection of natural resources.

    The Build Alternative is environmentally responsible and conserves and protects natural
    resources in its design. For documentation, see the technical reports on air quality, biological
    resources, and water resources.



6     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report       January 22, 2008
        Policy 4.3 – Creating Communities. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to increase access
        to goods and services and promote health by encouraging the development of compact
        communities and neighborhoods that integrate residential, commercial and employment land
        uses to help make shorter trips, transit, walking and bicycling feasible. Integrate features that
        support the use of transportation choices.

    The Build Alternative would help achieve this policy in several ways. First, it would support the
    commercial area at the intersection of Old Highway 99 and Wecks Road as the center of a
    compact neighborhood, fostering the integration of residential and commercial land uses. Second,
    the inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99 and the traffic
    signal at the intersection would support walking and bicycling. The provision of space on the
    extension for future sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development
    adjacent to the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust lands, also would help achieve
    this policy.

        Policy 5.1 – Safety. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to continually improve the safety
        and security of all modes and transportation facilities for system users including operators,
        passengers, pedestrians, recipients of goods and services, and property owners.

    The project would improve safety in the following ways:

           It would shift traffic from Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek),
            thereby reducing the amount of traffic exposed to the high crash rates near Interchange
            108 and the substandard deceleration and acceleration lane lengths of the ramps at both
            interchanges.

           The left-turn lane from Old Highway 99 to Wecks Road would help reduce the number of
            rear-end and turning movement collisions along Old Highway 99 between Interchanges
            103 (Riddle Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek).

           The traffic signal at the intersection of the Weaver Road extension, Old Highway 99, and
            Wecks Road would improve pedestrian safety at that location.

        Policy 7.1 – A Coordinated Transportation System. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        work collaboratively with other jurisdictions and agencies with the objective of removing
        barriers so the transportation system can function as one system.

    As referenced on page 15, ODOT has worked in collaboration with Douglas County and other
    jurisdictions and agencies to develop the proposed project.

        Policy 7.3 – Public Involvement and Consultation. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        involve Oregonians to the fullest practical extent in transportation planning and
        implementation in order to deliver a transportation system that meets the diverse needs of the
        state.

The public involvement program for the proposed project meets this policy. As referenced on page
15, a citizens advisory committee has helped guide the project, including in the identification and
screening of alternatives. In addition, ODOT and Douglas County hosted public open houses on the


January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report          7
project July 10 and September 19, 2007. Over 80 citizens attended the July meeting and about 30
citizens attended the September meeting.

1999 Oregon Highway Plan
Applicable policies and why the Build Alternative meets them follow:

       Policy 1B. Land Use and Transportation
                 State and local government must work together to provide safe and efficient roads
                  for livability and economic viability for all citizens.

    As referenced in the introduction, ODOT has worked in collaboration with Douglas County and
    other jurisdictions and agencies to develop the proposed project.

                  State and local government must share responsibility for the road system.

    In addition to collaborating with ODOT in the development of the project, Douglas County is
    contributing $6 million to the cost of the project, which is above the required minimum.

                  State and local government must work collaboratively in planning and decision-
                   making relating to transportation system management.

    As referenced in the introduction, ODOT has worked in collaboration with Douglas County and
    other jurisdictions and agencies to develop the proposed project.

              It is the policy of the State of Oregon to coordinate land use and transportation
               decisions to efficiently use public infrastructure investments to:

               o   Maintain the mobility and safety of the highway system;
               o   Foster compact development patterns in communities;
               o   Encourage the availability and use of transportation alternatives;
               o   Enhance livability and economic competitiveness; and
               o   Support acknowledged regional, city and county transportation system plans that
                   are consistent with this Highway Plan (ODOT 2006, p. 55)

       As discussed in the section on project consistency with the Douglas County Comprehensive
       Plan, below, the project is consistent with the County’s Transportation System Plan, which
       the LCDC has “acknowledged” as consistent with the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals.
       This means that it complies with the TPR, which requires that land use and transportation
       plans support each other.

       Policy 1C: State Highway Freight System. This policy states:

           It is the policy of the State of Oregon to balance the need for movement of goods with
           other uses of the highway system, and to recognize the importance of maintaining
           efficient through movement on major truck freight routes. (ODOT 2006, p. 66)




8    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report       January 22, 2008
    Enhancing “freight mobility to and within Myrtle Creek, Tri City, and adjacent communities” is
    among the purposes of the project, as stated on page 13. The project would improve freight
    mobility by:

       providing turning radii that would accommodate most trucks used for freight movement.

       providing an additional route for truck movement between Interstate 5 and the Tri City area.
        Tight turning radii at Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek) constrain its use for freight movement.

       providing another option for truck traffic to detour between Interstate 5 and Old Highway 99
        in cases of congestion or incidents along either facility. For example, if there were to be an
        accident on Interstate 5 southbound between Exits 108 and 106, today Interstate 5 traffic
        would only be detoured along Old Highway 99 between Exits 108 and 106. This traffic
        would need to remain on Old Highway 99 between Exits 108 and 103, a longer detour.

        Policy 1F: Highway Mobility Standards. Interstate 5 is classified as a Interstate Highway on
        the National Highway System (ODOT 2006, Highway Classification Maps), a Freeway,
        (ODOT 2006, p. 120) and a Statewide Freight Route (ODOT 2006, p. 68). The mobility
        standard applicable to the mainline of Interstate 5 is 0.70 (ODOT 2006, p. 83). The mobility
        standard applicable to the interchange ramp terminals is 0.75 (ODOT 2006, p. 83).

    The Build Alternative would meet the OHP mobility standard for the ramp terminals in 2027
    (DKS Associates, January 10, 2008, Table 5-3). The v/c ratio for the Interstate 5 mainline has not
    been projected.

        Policy 2D: Public Involvement. This policy provides for the opportunity of public input into
        planning decisions. (ODOT 2006, p. 108)

The public involvement program for the proposed project meets this policy. As referenced on page
15, a citizens advisory committee has helped guide the project, including in the identification and
screening of alternatives. In addition, ODOT and Douglas County hosted public open houses on the
project July 10 and September 19, 2007. Over 80 citizens attended the July meeting and about 30
citizens attended the September meeting.

        Policy 2F: Traffic Safety. This policy states that “It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        continually improve safety for all users of the highway system.” (ODOT 2006 p. 120)

    The project would improve safety in the ways described on page 7.

        Policy 3A: Classification and Spacing Standards. This policy states:

            It is the policy of the State of Oregon to manage the location, spacing and type of road
            and street intersections and approach roads on state highways to assure the safe and
            efficient operation of state highways consistent with the classification of the highways.
            (ODOT 2006, p. 120)

        The access spacing standard applicable to the ramp terminals is 1,350 feet. (ODOT 2006,
        Appendix C, Table 15)


January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report          9
     The project would move the intersection of Aviation Drive and Weaver Road eastward to
     increase the separation between it and intersection of the northbound exit ramp and Weaver Road.
     However, the separation still would be by only 244 feet, not the standard of 1,350 feet. To
     proceed with the project, ODOT would need to issue a “deviation” from the standard, which
     would provide a justification for not meeting the standard. (OAR 734-051-0135)

Interchange Area Management Plan, Interstate 5 Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road), 106
(Weaver Road), and 108 (Myrtle Creek)
The Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for Interstate 5 at exits 103, 106 and 108, (ODOT
October 2006), is part of the OHP. It provides transportation system planning for new designs of the
three interchanges at Myrtle Creek, Weaver Road, and Pruner Road. The IAMP discusses the
Weaver Road Extension Project and requires that both the City of Myrtle Creek and Douglas County
work with ODOT to implement the project in a way that is consistent with the policies set forth
within the IAMP. One of the IAMP’s goals is to “not preclude a future bridge over the South
Umpqua River connecting OR 99 to Weaver Road.” (ODOT October 2006 p. 16) It specifically
requires an “adoption of an IGA [intergovernmental agreement] with ODOT in regard to the Weaver
Road bridge project and Interchange 106.” (ODOT October 2006 p. 81) The IAMP states that
Douglas County and the City of Myrtle Creek must coordinate with ODOT in evaluating future land
use actions that could affect the function of the interchanges. It also supports the continued
agricultural use of land west of Interchange 106, which is currently zoned Exclusive Farm Use, as
described above. Among the “actions in the IAMP for which the local jurisdictions are responsible is:

     Implementing specific elements of the Access Management Plan for Interchange 106 (Douglas
     County) including:

        Requiring circulation plans as part of proposals for large developments that will provide
         access on secondary roadways as practical.
        Working with ODOT to relocate the intersection of Weaver Road/Aviation Drive further east
         from the interchange.
        Relocating and redesigning the Weaver Road/Aviation Drive intersection in conjunction with
         a new Weaver Road bridge.
        Undertaking any state-mandated land use actions required for bridge construction due to its
         location outside of the Urban Growth Boundary.
        Implementing improvements in the Weaver Road Corridor. (ODOT October 2006 p. 81)

The Build Alternative is consistent with the provisions of this IAMP. In particular, the project would
relocate the Weaver Road/Aviation Drive intersection, as the IAMP calls for. ODOT and Douglas
County would need to enter into an IGA regarding the project.

Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
Applicable policies are:

     Goal: to provide safe, accessible and convenient bicycling and walking facilities and to support
     and encourage increased levels of bicycling and walking.

     Action 1: Provide bikeway and walkway systems that are integrated with other
     transportation systems.

10       DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   January 22, 2008
    Strategy 1A. Integrate bicycle and pedestrian facility needs into all planning, design,
    construction and maintenance activities of the Oregon Department of Transportation, local
    governments and other transportation providers.

    Strategy 1B. Retrofit existing roadways with paved shoulders or bike lanes to accommodate
    bicyclists, and with sidewalks and safe crossings to accommodate pedestrians. (ODOT 1995 p.
    21)

The inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99 and the traffic
signal at the intersection would support walking and bicycling. The provision of space on the
extension for future sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development adjacent
to the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust lands, also would help achieve this policy.

Oregon Aviation Plan
Applicable policies and why the Build Alternative meets them follow:

       “Protect airports from incompatible land uses.” (ODOT 2000 p. 27) Regarding airports,
        including the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport, the text states that “The surrounding airspace
        must be free of obstructions to minimize safety problems for aircraft operations and the
        people on the ground.” The text also observes that “Cities and counties are responsible for
        ensuring compatibility of land uses and establishing appropriate zoning requirements around
        airports.”

The project would comply with the prohibition on obstructions. The provision’s of the Douglas
County Airport Overlay zone would not apply to the project, because, where the zone would
otherwise affect the project, the alignment crosses tribal trust land, to which County zoning does not
apply. However, the proposed project design would avoid any associated structures (specifically,
light standards) from exceeding 35 feet in height, which is what the overlay zone would require.
(Douglas County LUDO section 3.35.800(3)(c))

       “Provide Oregon with an airport system that is integrated with surface transportation modes,
        and allows for a choice of modes for the movement of people and goods.” (ODOT 2000 p. 30)

The Build Alternative would improve the integration of the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport with
surface transportation by adding a link to the local roadway system.

Douglas County Transportation System Plan
The Build Alternative would provide the extension of Weaver Road over the South Umpqua River to
intersect with Old Highway 99 called for by policies in the Douglas County Transportation System
Plan (TSP). The policy section of the circulation plan portion of the TSP, which applies to three
urban incorporated areas of the County, including Tri City, states as a goal “to provide for safe,
convenient and efficient vehicular circulation through the urban unincorporated areas of the
County.” Objective B under this policy is to “to recognize and address the specific circulation
problems which exist in the three plan areas.” The third policy related to Tri City under this
objective is to “promote the development of an arterial connection between Highway 99 and
Interstate 5 at the Weaver Road Interchange.” The background discussion states:



January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report     11
     As a means of reducing traffic volumes on Highway 99, a connection is proposed between Old
     Pacific Highway and I-5 at the Weaver Road Interchange. This arterial connection is proposed to
     intersect Old Pacific Highway opposite Wecks Road and would provide an alternate route for
     traffic between I-5 south of Tri City or from the Riddle area and the northern portion of Tri City
     or Myrtle Creek. And, from the north, it would provide an alternate route for traffic between I-5
     north of Myrtle Creek and most of Tri City. This arterial connection is proposed to intersect
     Highway 99 opposite Wecks Road. As part of this project the acute intersection of Wecks Road
     with Highway 99 should be modified to provide a 90 degree intersection. . .

The TSP classifies Old Highway 99 as a Major Collector from Interstate 5 Exit 103 to Wecks Road,
and as an Arterial from Wecks Road to Interstate 5 Exit 108. (Douglas County TSP p. 1-11) The
mobility standard applicable to Old Highway 99 from Exit 103 to Wecks Road (as a major collector)
is a v/c ratio of 0.90. The standard applicable to Old Highway 99 from Wecks Road to Exit 108 (as
an arterial) is 0.85. (Douglas County TSP p. 1-3) The forecasted 2027 v/c ratio for the intersection of
Weaver Road and Old Highway 99 is 0.74, (DKS Associates, January 10, 2008, Table 5-3) which
meets the standards.

Other TSP policies applicable to the project are:

     Transportation Policy Objective B, Policy 11. Bicycle and/or pedestrian ways shall be provided
     to accommodate access from commercial or high density residential developments to adjacent
     residential areas, transit stops, and neighborhood activity centers within one-half mile of
     development in the Urban Unincorporated of Green or where Urban Growth Management
     Agreements requires (sic) improvements.” (Douglas County TSP p. 1-50)

     Bicycle Transportation Objective A, Policy 2. Bikeways shall be provided which satisfy
     utilitarian needs by connecting major residential areas to major activity areas (recreational,
     employment, institutional, commercial) within the County.

The inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99 and the traffic
signal at the intersection would meet these policies. The provision of space on the extension for
future sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development adjacent to the Myrtle
Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust lands, also would help achieve the policies.




12      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report      January 22, 2008
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION
For many years Douglas County has recognized the need to find a solution to transportation
connectivity, safety, and freight mobility issues within Myrtle Creek, Oregon and the adjacent
communities of Tri City and Riddle. The project proposed to meet these needs would consist of a
new arterial connection between the urbanized area on the east side of the South Umpqua River and
the existing Interstate 5 interchange at Weaver Road on the west side of the river. The Weaver Road
Extension would be located south of the City of Myrtle Creek, Oregon, and just west of the Tri City
area. The urbanized area of Myrtle Creek-Tri City is located primarily on the east side of the South
Umpqua River, with a small portion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) west of the river
encompassing the Myrtle Creek Airport, just south of the Interstate 5 Interchange 106 (Weaver
Road). Interstate 5 is located on the west side of the South Umpqua River. Interstate 5 Interchange
108 (Myrtle Creek) and Interchange 103 (Riddle Road) connect to the Myrtle Creek – Tri City
urbanized area. There is an additional existing Interstate 5 exit located at Interchange 106 (Weaver
Road), which provides access to the urban area adjacent to and including the Myrtle Creek
Municipal Airport and rural areas to the west of Interstate 5 along Weaver Road.

There is only one major north-south route, Old Highway 99, running through the Myrtle Creek-Tri
City area. It connects to Interstate 5 at Interchanges 108 (Myrtle Creek) and 103 (Riddle Road).
Because of distance between these connection points, this route can become congested during peak
traffic hours. Of particular concern is the high number of traffic crashes that occur in the vicinity of
Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek). Crashes at this location can result in detoured traffic using Old
Highway 99 between Interchange 103 (Riddle Road) and Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek).

1.2 Purpose of the Project
The purpose of the project is to enhance transportation connections, safety, and freight mobility to
and within Myrtle Creek, Tri City, and adjacent communities.

1.3 Need for the Project
The need for the project is based on limited connectivity between Interstate 5 and Myrtle Creek and
Tri City areas, and projected growth in traffic and future capacity issues along Old Highway 99
between Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek), as well as at Interchanges 103
(Riddle Road), 106 (Weaver Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek).

1.3.1 Safety
The last three years of available crash data (2004 through 2006) on the study area roadways and
interchanges were obtained from ODOT to identify areas of traffic safety concerns. Table 1-1 shows
a summary location and frequency of accidents within the study area along with statewide average
crash rates for 2006.

                                  Table 1-1: Accident Data (2004-2006)
                                                                                                    ODOT*
                                    Total   Fatal  People       People    Intersection/Segment
Location                                                                                             2006
                                   Crashes Crashes Killed       Injured        Crash Rate
                                                                                                  Crash Rates
Interchange 103 – NB
                                           9       0        0        13                   0.78              -
Ramps/Riddle Rd Int.



January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report            13
                                          Table 1-1: Accident Data (2004-2006)
                                                                                                                       ODOT*
                                            Total   Fatal  People             People     Intersection/Segment
Location                                                                                                                2006
                                           Crashes Crashes Killed             Injured         Crash Rate
                                                                                                                     Crash Rates
Interchange 103 – SB Ramps/Riddle
                                                    6         0           0          2                       0.52                  -
Rd Int.
Interchange 106                                     0         0           0          0                           -                 -

Interchange 108                                     1         0           0          1                           -                 -

Interstate 5 (MP 102.5 to 108.5)                   48         1           1         38                       0.27               0.39
Interstate 5 (MP 107.5 to 108.5) near
                                                   33         0           0         23                       1.12               0.39
Exit 108
Interstate 5 (MP 105.5 to 106.5) near
                                                    2         0           0          1                       0.07               0.39
Exit 106
Interstate 5 (MP 102.5 to 103.5) near
                                                    1         0           0          2                       0.03               0.39
Exit 103
Old Highway 99 between Exits 103
                                                   43         1           1         40                       0.78               1.26
and 108
*The ODOT 2006 statewide average crash rate for freeways is 0.39, and for non-freeways is 1.26. 2006 State Highway Crash Rate
Tables, ODOT, July 2007.


The segment of Interstate 5 between M.P. 107.5 and 108.5 has a considerably higher crash rate than
the other Interstate 5 segments. The crash rate at this segment of highway is approximately three
times higher than the statewide average crash rate for freeways. This high crash rate is likely due to
the abrupt and sharp curvature of the Interstate 5 mainline alignment through Interchange 108. Also,
the Interchange 103 and Interchange 108 northbound and southbound ramps do not meet
deceleration and acceleration lane lengths required by current ODOT standards, which could
contribute to Interstate 5 accidents in these areas. The construction of the Weaver Road extension
will likely reduce the number of vehicles using these interchanges. The NB Ramps/Riddle Rd. and
SB Ramps/Riddle Rd. intersections crash rates are relatively low (less than 1 accident per million
total entering vehicles).

Accidents reported on Old Highway 99 between Interchanges 103 and 108 were mainly rear-end and
turning movement collisions. It’s likely that the frequent driveways and limited number of left turn
lanes along Old Highway 99 may have contributed to some of these collisions, especially rear-end
type collisions. The crash rate at this segment of roadway is lower than the state average crash rate
for non-freeways.

Year 2007 Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) ratings for Interstate 5 through the study area were
also examined to identify any areas in need of mitigation. The SPIS is a method developed by
ODOT for identifying hazardous locations on state highways. The SPIS score is based on three years
of crash data and considers crash frequency, crash rate, and crash severity. In general, locations
ranking within the State’s top 10% of SPIS scores should be considered for potential mitigation. No
intersections or roadway segments within the study area are listed in the year 2007 top 5% and 10%
SPIS list.

1.3.2 Connectivity
Connectivity in the transportation network between Interstate 5 and the mid-Myrtle Creek and Tri
City areas are limited today. As a result, in the case of an Interstate 5 incident, detours off of


14      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                            January 22, 2008
Interstate 5 can be lengthy. Also, connectivity is limited for emergency vehicles, which can increase
response times.

1.3.3 Growth
Future population growth is expected as described in the IAMP and Myrtle Creek Transportation
System Plan. Due to the proximity of Myrtle Creek and Tri City, continued growth and development
in these two cities will tend to blend the two communities into a single urbanized area. With the
increase in population comes an increase in traffic. Based on the IAMP for Interchange 103 (Riddle
Road), Interchange 106 (Weaver Road), and Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek), an increase in traffic
of approximately 2% per year along Old Highway 99 was projected. Increased congestion will be
experienced in future years along Old Highway 99 and at Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road), 106
(Weaver Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek) as a result of the increase in traffic volumes.

1.3.4 Capacity and Congestion
Year 2027 intersection performance was evaluated at 11 study intersections for the Build and No-
Build Alternatives. Under No-Build conditions, the Main Street/Riverside Drive westbound
approach will operate at volume to capacity ratio of 0.97 and will fail to comply with the Douglas
County mobility standards by year 2027. All the other intersections will meet the ODOT and
Douglas County mobility standards. Under the Build Alternative, all the study intersections will
meet the ODOT and Douglas County mobility standards.

1.4 Alternatives Considered
In 2007, Douglas County formed the primary decision making body for the Weaver Road Extension
Project, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The TAC is made up of technical representatives
from Douglas County, the City of Myrtle Creek, (ODOT), Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), and other local agencies. The TAC represents the interests of the larger public and is
responsible for project management decisions and assisting in the successful development of the
project.

In addition to the TAC, a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) was established to serve in an
advisory role to the TAC and the Project Design Team. The CAC includes stakeholders such as
elected and appointed officials, business and property owners, homeowner association
representatives, and special interest and advocacy group representatives. From June 2007 to
November 2007, the CAC and the TAC met on a monthly basis to develop the project Purpose and
Need and to identify, discuss, and refine potential alternatives.

The CAC and TAC initially developed a wide range of alternatives (Figure 1-1). The study area for
these 12 alternatives encompassed the valley surrounding the cities of Myrtle Creek, Tri City, and
Riddle. The 12 alternatives were then evaluated against the purpose and need of the project
described above. Those that did not meet the purpose and need were eliminated while those
alternatives that either fully met or partially met the purpose and need were carried forward in the
alternatives analysis.




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report      15
Figure 1-1: Wide Range of Alternatives




Through the alternatives analysis process, the alternatives were further evaluated against the project
goals and objectives, Oregon Land Use planning, FHWA/ODOT transportation policies, and planned
future actions.

Through a series of TAC, CAC and public meetings, the wide range of alternatives was reduced
through a screening process to a single Build Alternative to move into the Environmental
Assessment process. Based on the alternatives analysis process for the Weaver Road Extension
Project, the CAC and TAC voted to dismiss all but Alternative 1B: Weaver Road – Wecks Road
Connection. The following sections provide a description of both the No-Build and Build
Alternatives.

1.5 No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would result in no improvements or modifications in the project area other
than those that are already committed and funded in local plans. For the purposes of this analysis, the
following projects that are not yet completed, but are currently planned and funded, are assumed to
be in place by 2027 for both the No-Build and the Build Alternative:

    Interstate 5: Weaver – Bundle 306 is a bridge project that would replace five bridges and repair
     one bridge in the Myrtle Creek area. The following bridges would be replaced:
             o Riddle Road overcrossing over Interstate 5.
             o Interstate 5 northbound over the South Umpqua River.
             o Interstate 5 southbound over the South Umpqua River.
             o Interstate 5 over the Central Oregon Railroad (UPRR line).
             o Weaver Road overcrossing over Interstate 5. (Construction in progress)



16      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report    January 22, 2008
            The following bridge would be repaired:
            o Interstate 5 over connection to Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek) southbound ramps.

   Interstate 5: Interchange 103 (Riddle Road) NB Ramps would construct a new northbound on-
    ramp from Riddle Road to Interstate 5.

   South Umpqua River (Pruner Road) Bridge Section would replace the Pruner Road bridge over
    the South Umpqua River.

   Tri City Collector Street Improvements would construct six new streets in Tri City. The
    following six streets would be constructed from their connection with Old Highway 99 heading
    east:
     Klimback Street
     Gael Street
     Woodcrest Drive
     Meadow Lane
     Aker Drive
     Celestial Way

   Umpqua River Bridge Rehabilitation. This project is currently under way. It is widening the
    Myrtle Creek Arch Bridge on Main Street just east of the Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek) ramps
    with Interstate 5.

1.6 Build Alternative
Alternative 1B: Weaver Road – Wecks Road Connection was chosen as the Build Alternative
(Figure 1-2). This alternative would involve a new connection between the existing Weaver Road
interchange at Interstate 5 and Old Highway 99, across the South Umpqua River. It would connect to
Old Highway 99 in the vicinity of Wecks Road. The new connection would be two lanes, except at
the ends where it would widen out to three lanes to accommodate left turn movements.

The new roadway would include wide shoulders to accommodate pedestrians and bicycles and
would be constructed in a manner that would allow for sidewalks to be added in the future. The
connection at Old Highway 99 would include a new signal.

The new roadway would connect to the intersection of Old Highway 99 at Wecks Road, though
Wecks Road would be realigned to meet Old Highway 99 at an approximately 90 degree angle. This
means that a portion (+350 feet) of Wecks Road to the east of Old Highway 99 would be
reconstructed as part of the Build Alternative.

The new roadway would accommodate a new connection with Aviation Drive, which is currently
located immediately east of the northbound ramps to Interstate 5 at Interchange 106 (Weaver Road).




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report    17
Figure 1-2: Build Alternative




The Build Alternative would connect to the existing Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) at its existing
location. The Project Design Team determined that the existing interchange location is the optimal
location for a connection to the proposed Weaver Road Extension Project for the following reasons:
 This location allows the Build Alternative to cross the South Umpqua River at a perpendicular
    angle, allowing for the shortest possible bridge span of the river and minimizing environmental
    effects on the river and associated habitat.
 If Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) were moved north, the Build Alternative would likely have a
    greater effect on a salmon spawning bed located in the South Umpqua River immediately north
    of the proposed bridge crossing.
 If Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) were moved north, the northbound on-ramp would be closer
    to the South Umpqua River, increasing the potential for adverse effects to river habitat.
 If Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) were moved north, the new improvements would impact
    farmlands, including land zoned as Exclusive Farm Use.
 If Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) were moved south, the Build Alternative would be more
    likely to conflict with the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport clearance zone.
 There would be no net benefit to traffic operations by relocating Interchange 106 (Weaver Road)
    from its existing location.




18    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   January 22, 2008
2. METHODS

2.1 Introduction
This section describes the methods used in preparing the report.

2.2 Related Federal, State and Local Regulations
See the description of applicable Federal, state, and local plans and policies beginning on page 39.
They are the:

      Statewide Planning Goals and Transportation Planning Rule
      State Agency Coordination Program
      Oregon Transportation Plan
      1999 Oregon Highway Plan
      Interchange Area Management Plan, Interstate 5 Interchanges 103 (Riddle), 106 (Weaver Road),
       and 108 (Myrtle Creek)
      Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
      Oregon Aviation Plan
      Douglas County Comprehensive Plan, including its Transportation System Plan

2.3 Methods

2.3.1 Data Collection
Consultant team members obtained information on existing land use from Douglas County property
tax assessment records and mapped comprehensive plan land use designations and zoning from
maps obtained from Douglas County and the City of Myrtle Creek. They field checked the mapping
of existing land use in the immediate vicinity of the proposed project. Team members obtained
copies of applicable comprehensive plans and zoning codes from the Douglas County web site3 and
staff and from City of Myrtle Creek staff. Team members also assembled copies of applicable State
of Oregon plans.

2.3.2 Methods for Data Analysis and Impact Assessment

Direct Effects
Consultant team members used geographic information system tools to measure the amount of land
that would be purchased for right-of-way, tabulated by existing use, Douglas County Comprehensive
Plan designation, and Douglas County zoning.

Indirect Effects
Consultant team members:
Identified the area within which most indirect land use impacts of the Build Alternative would likely
occur. Figure 2-1 shows the boundaries of this area, labeled “Land Use Study Area” (LUSA). It
includes the area that the project would benefit by improved access and reduced travel times.

Mapped existing land use and Douglas County and City of Myrtle Creek Comprehensive Plan
designations and zoning in the LUSA.

3
    http://www.co.douglas.or.us/default.asp.

January 22, 2008        DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   19
Figure 2-1 Project Area and Location Map




20    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   January 22, 2008
   Identified the comprehensive plan policies applicable to the zones and the uses permitted by the
    zoning regulations.
   Reviewed the literature on the indirect land use impacts of transportation projects.4
   Estimated the commuter time savings the Build Alternative would yield, in consultation with the
    transportation analyst members of the consultant team. This included measuring travel time
    between: a) Interstate 5/Harvard Boulevard Interchange in Roseburg and the intersection of Old
    Highway 99 and Wecks Road via Interstate 5, Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek) and Old Highway
    99; and, b) between Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek) and Interchange 106 (Weaver Road). The
    traffic analyst estimated travel time from the southbound ramp terminus of Interchange 106
    (Weaver Road) and the intersection of Old Highway 99 and Wecks Road via the Weaver Road
    extension.
   Evaluated the likely indirect land use impacts of the project, given the amount of commuter
    travel time savings, proximity to and visibility from Interstate 5, existing land uses, allowed uses,
    restrictions on development imposed by floodplain zoning, restrictions on changes in plan
    designations and zoning, and quantities of vacant land.

Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies
Consultant team members identified plans and policies applicable to the proposed project, then
compared the proposed project under the Build Alternative with each applicable policy, referencing
the project’s design features and impacts, as identified in this and other technical reports.

2.3.3 Methods for Determining Potential Mitigation Measures
The project would not have any adverse impacts on land use and is consistent with applicable plans
and policies, so there was no need to determine potential mitigation measures.




4
 In the list of references at the end of this report, see the publications by Arvin, Uri, et al.; ECONorthwest, et al.; Louis
Berger Group, Inc.; and Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc.

January 22, 2008      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                          21
3. AGENCY COORDINATION AND INVOLVEMENT

3.1 Federal
ODOT and Douglas County have initiated consultations with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) of
the US Department of the Interior regarding the project because the project would cross land the BIA
holds in trust for the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians. As stated on page 15, the
FHWA is represented on the TAC.

3.2 State
ODOT staff coordinated with staff of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) on three occasions:

1. In the spring of 2007, ODOT staff consulted DLCD staff regarding Statewide Planning Program
   jurisdiction over tribal trust lands and the need for exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals.
2. A representative of DLCD attended a August 21, 2007, meeting of Collaborative Environmental
   and Transportation Agreement for Streamlining (CETAS).5 The representative asked questions
   related to land ownership and future tribal development plans and expressed views regarding the
   need for an exception to Statewide Planning Goals if tribal ownership extended to the center of
   the South Umpqua River.
3. Douglas County prepared a "white paper" for DLCD stating why an exception to Statewide
   Planning Goals would not be required, which ODOT provided to DLCD in October 2007. Later
   that month, DLCD staff, its Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney, and ODOT’s DOJ
   attorney agreed that the project would not need a goal exception.

3.3 Local

3.3.1 Counties
Douglas County is the principal sponsor of the Weaver Road Extension Project. County
representatives sit on both the TAC and CAC, as described on page 15. County staff reviewed and
commented on drafts of the Land Use Reconnaissance Report 6 and of this report. County staff also
prepared the “white paper” on the need for exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals, as referenced in
Section 3.2, immediately above. Consultant team members also obtained from County staff
comprehensive plan and zoning maps and texts.

3.3.2 Cities
The City of Myrtle Creek manager sits on the project’s TAC. Consultant team members also
obtained from City staff comprehensive plan and zoning maps and texts.

3.3.3 Neighborhood Groups

There was no consultation with neighborhood groups.


5
  Members of CETAS are the Federal Highway Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, DLCD, Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Oregon Department of State Lands,
State Historic Preservation Office, ODOT, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Environmental Protection Agency, and
US Fish and Wildlife Service. See http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HIGHWAY/GEOENVIRONMENTAL/cetas.shtml.
6
  URS Corporation, Land Use Reconnaissance Report, September 6, 2007.

January 22, 2008    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                 23
4. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

4.1 Existing and Planned Land Use

4.1.1 Existing Land Use
Figure 4-1 shows existing land use in the LUSA. As the figure shows, land use on the west side of
the South Umpqua River is a mix of low density residential and agricultural uses, and also includes a
small airport and adjoining vacant land. The map shows the predominant use on each parcel; some
parcels shown as in agricultural use have residences on them and vice versa. Land on the east side of
the river is urbanized and mainly residential, but there are scattered commercial uses along Old
Highway 99 and some dispersed vacant land. Land between the river and Old Highway 99 north of
the proposed alignment is primarily in agricultural use.

4.1.2 Comprehensive Plan Designations

Douglas County Designations
Figure 4-2 shows comprehensive plan designations in the LUSA. Most of the LUSA on the east side
of the South Umpqua River is within what the Douglas County Comprehensive Plan calls the “Tri
City Urban Unincorporated Area” (UUA). The portion of the UUA within the LUSA is an
“exception area,” under the terms of the Oregon Statewide Planning Program. Exception areas
include lands outside urban growth boundaries (UGBs) that were already committed to urban uses
when the State of Oregon enacted the program in the early 1970s. The Douglas County
Comprehensive Plan states that “. . . Tri City was incorporated into Myrtle Creek’s Urban Growth
Boundary as an element of the adoption of Myrtle Creek’s Urban Growth Management
Agreement . . .”7 Urban growth management agreements are agreements between a county and city
that govern land that is within a city’s UGB, but outside its city limits. Within the LUSA, the Myrtle
Creek city limits include only the Municipal Airport, a corridor containing Old Highway 99 between
the airport and the main Myrtle Creek city limits, and recently-annexed land in the LUSA’s northeast
corner. The land parcels shown on Figure 4-2 as tribal lands are owned in trust for the Cow Creek
Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians. As such, they are exempt from County planning and zoning
laws. With these exceptions, Douglas County governs land use in the LUSA. Douglas County also
governs the rest of the LUSA, which is rural.

Regarding the plan designations in the LUSA, the Douglas County Comprehensive Plan8 says:

      Low Density Residential. Up to 3 dwelling units per acre allowed. This designation is intended
      to accommodate limited usage in areas where significant constraints to development exist. This
      designation has been applied to areas within floodplains, where it reflects the predominant land
      use pattern of the area, areas with steep slopes, and in areas where higher density development
      would create traffic safety problems.

Medium Density Residential. Up to 7 dwelling units per acre allowed. This designation is intended
to accommodate the majority of future residential development in urban unincorporated areas. This
designation has been applied to those lands with few, if any, constraints to development.


7
    Douglas County Comprehensive Plan, revised December 6, 2006, p. 15-54.
8
    Ibid., Appendix C, pp. 2 and 20.

January 22, 2008       DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   25
Figure 4-1 Land Use




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   27
Figure 4-2 Comprehensive Plan Designations




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   29
    High Density Residential. Up to 20 dwelling units per acre allowed. This designation will
    accommodate multi-family development and mobile home parks, and has been applied (as
    justified by need) to those lands which are close to commercial nodes, major transportation
    routes, and where it reflects existing land use.

    Community Commercial. This designation is intended to accommodate light retail and service
    commercial uses, thus satisfying the daily needs of community residents. It has been applied to
    limited areas in an effort to aggregate such uses, thereby establishing retail commercial cores for
    each UUA.

    Tourist Commercial. This designation is intended to accommodate uses which cater to
    transitory tourist traffic or other uses which require high traffic volumes. It has been applied only
    to those areas where such uses exist or a need for such uses has been demonstrated.

    Public/Semi-Public. This plan designation identifies areas devoted to public uses such as parks
    and school facilities, or those lands devoted to the provision of public services such as electric,
    water and telephone. This land use designation may also indicate other public or semipublic uses
    or activities which would not be characterized by another land use designation. Public land uses
    consist generally of buildings and facilities that are owned and supported by the public at large
    through tax levies of various types. Semipublic uses are not usually supported through tax dollars
    but do provide services and facilities for various segments of the public.

    Limited Commercial. Promotes Community Commercial uses which do not generate significant
    amounts of traffic. This designation has been applied to lands within the Tri City Urban area on
    the west side of the Old Pacific Highway at the northern end of the Urban Area. This designation
    is intended to allow for reasonable economic use of these parcels while ensuring that vehicular
    access onto Old Pacific Highway is minimized.

    Agriculture. The intent of the Agriculture designation is to preserve and maintain prime
    agriculture lands for farm use. It is also intended to provide protection from nonfarm uses, as
    well as provide encouragement and incentives for activities which enhance the agricultural
    resources of Douglas County.

    Farm/Forest Transitional. The Farm/Forest Transitional designation is intended to conserve
    and maintain open space lands for forest use or farm use or both, or for the protection of natural
    resource areas. Farm/Forest Transitional defines those resource lands which have some
    characteristics of both Agricultural Lands and Timberlands. Influenced by a number of factors
    (including ownership sizes, relationship to other resource lands, past use, present vegetative
    cover and topographic conditions), the productive level of Farm/Forest Transitional land may
    fluctuate considerably. Though it is recognized that these lands can and should be used for large
    and small scale agriculture, forestry or both, no priority for forest or farming activities is
    intended.

Myrtle Creek Designations
The land within the LUSA under Myrtle Creek jurisdiction has only two comprehensive plan
designations. The Myrtle Creek Comprehensive Plan designates the Municipal Airport Public/Semi-
Public. The Plan contains no policy language regarding this designation, but states, “This land use


January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        31
category includes public utilities and services, schools, library, hospital, parks, cemeteries, public
buildings, fraternal organizations and churches.”9 The Plan designates as Medium Density
Residential the land the City recently annexed in the LUSA’s northeast corner. Regarding this
designation, the Comprehensive Plan states:

     Up to 7 dwelling units per acre. This designation is intended to accommodate the
     majority of future residential development in the Tri City Urban Area including
     predominantly single family detached units, duplexes and mobile homes which are
     not contained within parks. It has been applied to those lands with very limited, if
     any, constraints to development.10

4.1.3   Zoning

Douglas County Zoning

Base Zones. Figure 4-3 shows zoning in the LUSA. Regarding the Douglas County zones in the
LUSA, the County Land Use and Development Ordinance (LUDO)11 says:

     Suburban Residential (RS). The Suburban Residential classification is intended to provide for a
     primarily single family suburban environment within which certain limited agricultural
     pursuits may be carried on. It is intended to be applied in those areas which are within adopted
     Urban Growth Boundaries, yet have limited urban services.

     Single-Family Residential (R1). The Single-Family Residential classification is intended to
     provide for a medium density urban residential use plus related compatible uses such as schools
     and parks. The classification is designed for those areas adjacent or close to existing cities or
     areas with an urban character in which urban services such as public water and sewer are
     available.

     Multiple-Family Residential (R2). The Multiple-Family Residential classification is intended to
     provide a wide range of housing density and type while preserving the residential character of an
     area. This zone applies to properties with minimal topographic limitations; locations which are
     readily accessible by and to major streets; and adjacent to public open space or commercial
     services. This zone is intended for areas with a full range of public services including public
     sewer and water.

     Rural Commercial (CRE). The Rural Commercial classification is intended to maintain pre-
     existing rural area commercial uses and to create and enhance opportunities for small scale low
     impact and rural resource related commercial uses. Uses which serve the traveling public are also
     consistent with this classification. It is intended that new uses will not exceed the capacity of the
     area to provide water and absorb sewage. While uses located within this zone may provide
     employment opportunities, it is the intent of this zone to support rural levels of commercial
     development which have a limited impact on surrounding uses and communities or cities and
     which do not use a public sewage disposal system.

9
  City of Myrtle Creek Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 14 (web version; no page numbers).
10
   Ibid., Chapter 13.
11
   Douglas County Land Use and Development Ordinance, Chapter 3, Zoning,
http://www.co.douglas.or.us/planning/tbl_cont.asp.

32      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        January 22, 2008
    Figure 4-3, Zoning




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   33
       Tourist Commercial (CT). The Tourist Commercial classification is intended to provide areas
       for the orderly and attractive development of commercial uses oriented to the tourist and
       recreation public. It is intended to be applied around freeway interchanges and in close proximity
       to recreational areas.

       Community Commercial (C2). The Community Commercial classification is intended to
       provide areas for localized shopping facilities. It is intended to preserve and enhance areas with a
       wide range of retail sales and service establishments serving both long and short term needs in
       compact locations.

       Exclusive Farm Use – Cropland (FC-1). The purpose and intent of the Exclusive Farm Use-
       Cropland zone is to provide areas for the continued practice of agriculture and permit the
       establishment of only those new uses which are compatible with agricultural activities.

       Farm Forest (FF). The Farm Forest Classification is intended to promote management,
       utilization, and conservation of forested grazing lands, lands which might not be forested but
       have such potential, and non-tillable grazing lands adjacent to forested lands. The purpose of this
       classification is to encourage sound management practices on such lands for agricultural or forest
       resource uses, including but not limited to: watershed management; recreation; fish and wildlife
       management; and agricultural activities consistent with sound forest and agricultural
       management practices, to retain lands within this district for farm and forest use, protecting such
       land from nonresource use and conflicts.

Overlay Zones. The following overlay zones exist within the LUSA. See Figure 4-4.

       Airport Impact Overlay (AIO): The airport impact overlay is applied to land near the airport
       and is described in Section 3.35.800 of the code. Land within the Airport Approach Area (a
       trapezoidal area extending 2,500 feet from the end of the runway that is 250 feet wide at the
       runway end and 750 feet wide at the far end) is subject to a 35-foot height limit. The Airport
       Clear Area, defined as the first 1,250 feet of the Airport Approach Area, permits “Roadways or
       other uses consistent with the underlying zone which do not include any permanent structures or
       objects, and which are located in such a manner that vehicle lights will not make it difficult for
       pilots to distinguish between landing lights and vehicle lights, or result in glare, or in any other
       way impair visibility in the vicinity of the landing approach.”12

       Design Review Overlay (AC): The design review overlay includes provisions to ensure
       “…architectural design, landscaping, yard width and depth, method of ingress and egress, and
       other special site design features are of such standards as to achieve attractive communities and
       safe thoroughfares.”13 This overlay zone applies to areas along Old Highway 99 that are
       designated Limited Commercial under the Comprehensive Plan. According to the plan, the
       Limited Commercial designation is intended to regulate access to the highway in order to reduce
       traffic congestion. As a result, the AC overlay within the LUSA is likely to have been imposed
       primarily to regulate access, and not so much to regulate the landscaping or appearance of
       development on those lands.


12
     Ibid., Section 3.35.800(3)(e)(2).
13
     Ibid., Section 3.1.080(9).

January 22, 2008         DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report     35
    Figure 4-4, Overlay Zones




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   37
     Floodplain Overlay (FP): As Figure 4-4 shows, properties along the South Umpqua River are in
     the FP overlay zone. The LUDO requires permits for the construction of structures within the FP
     zone.14 Permit requirements are intended to “minimize public and private losses due to flood
     conditions.”15

     Riparian Vegetation Corridor Overlay (RVCO): In the LUSA, this overlay zone requires
     development to be set back from the river bank at least 50 feet, unless a variance is obtained.16

     Peripheral Big Game Habitat Overlay (BGHO): This overlay limits dwelling density in
     support of habitat management. In the LUSA, it applies west of Interstate

5.4.2 Applicable Plans and Policies

4.2.1 Federal
No Federal policies addressing land use apply to the project. The Coastal Zone Management Act (16
USC 1461-1465) does not apply because the project is on the east side of the Coast Range of
mountains. The Farmland Protection Policy Act (7 USC 4201-4209) does not apply because the
project would not convert farmland not already committed to urban development.

4.2.2 State of Oregon

Oregon Statewide Planning Program

Statewide Planning Goals and Transportation Planning Rule
Once the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) has “acknowledged”
city and county comprehensive plans as consistent with the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals, the
goals do not apply directly to projects such as the Weaver Road Extension. Because LCDC has
acknowledged both the Douglas County and Myrtle Creek comprehensive plans, the Statewide
Planning Goals do not apply directly to the Project. Nonetheless, the LCDC administrative rules
implementing Goal 12, Transportation, known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), specify
when an “exception” to Goal 12 is necessary for a highway improvement. OAR 660-012-0065 lists
transportation improvements allowed on rural lands. OAR 660-012-0070 requires an exception to
Goal 12 for transportation projects that are not included within 660-012-0065 and specifies the
conditions such exceptions must meet.

State Agency Coordination Program
Statewide Planning Program law requires ODOT and other state agencies to carry out their duties “in
a manner compatible with” local comprehensive plans and land use regulations.17 In addition, they
are required to have policies to coordinate with other agencies and local governments in the
performance of their duties under the Statewide Planning Program. ODOT implemented these
requirements by adopting an administrative rule, referred to as ODOT’s State Agency Coordination
Program. It states that ODOT will rely upon affected cities and counties:


14
   Ibid, Section 3.30.270.
15
   Ibid., Section 3.30.000.
16
   Ibid., Section 3.32.200.
17
   Oregon Revised Statues section 197.180(1)(b).

January 22, 2008     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        39
     to make all plan amendments and zone changes necessary to achieve compliance with the
     statewide planning goals and compatibility with local comprehensive plans after completion of
     the Draft Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment and before completion
     of the Final Environmental Impact Statement or Revised Environmental Assessment. These shall
     include the adoption of general and specific plan provisions necessary to address applicable
     statewide planning goals.18

Under this program, ODOT may not issue a revised EA and proceed with the project until after
Douglas County has adopted any amendments to its comprehensive plan or zoning code necessary
for the project to comply with them.

4.2.3 Oregon Transportation Plan
The Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) establishes broad policies for transportation in Oregon.19
Policies specifically applicable to the Weaver Road Extension include:

Policy 2.1 – Capacity and Operational Efficiency. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to manage
the transportation system to improve its capacity and operational efficiency for the long term benefit
of people and goods movement.

        Policy 4.1 – Environmentally Responsible Transportation System. It is the policy of the State
        of Oregon to provide a transportation system that is environmentally responsible and
        encourages conservation and protection of natural resources.

        Policy 4.3 – Creating Communities. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to increase access
        to goods and services and promote health by encouraging the development of compact
        communities and neighborhoods that integrate residential, commercial and employment land
        uses to help make shorter trips, transit, walking and bicycling feasible. Integrate features that
        support the use of transportation choices.

        Policy 5.1 – Safety. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to continually improve the safety
        and security of all modes and transportation facilities for system users including operators,
        passengers, pedestrians, recipients of goods and services, and property owners.

        Policy 7.1 – A Coordinated Transportation System. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        work collaboratively with other jurisdictions and agencies with the objective of removing
        barriers so the transportation system can function as one system.

        Policy 7.3 – Public Involvement and Consultation. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        involve Oregonians to the fullest practical extent in transportation planning and
        implementation in order to deliver a transportation system that meets the diverse needs of the
        state.




18
  Oregon Administrative Rules section 731-015-0075(3).
19
  Oregon Transportation Plan, adopted September 20, 2006,
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/ortransplanupdate.shtml#Oregon_Transportation_Plan___Adopted_September_2
0__2006.

40     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report       January 22, 2008
4.2.4 Oregon Highway Plan
1999 Oregon Highway Plan. Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) policies relevant to the project include:

Policy 1B. Land Use and Transportation. The policy states:

             This policy recognizes the role of both State and local governments related to the
             state highway system:
                    State and local government must work together to provide safe and efficient roads
                     for livability and economic viability for all citizens.
                    State and local government must share responsibility for the road system.
                    State and local government must work collaboratively in planning and decision-
                     making relating to transportation system management.

             It is the policy of the State of Oregon to coordinate land use and transportation decisions
             to efficiently use public infrastructure investments to:
                     Maintain the mobility and safety of the highway system;
                     Foster compact development patterns in communities;
                     Encourage the availability and use of transportation alternatives;
                     Enhance livability and economic competitiveness; and
                     Support acknowledged regional, city and county transportation system plans that
                      are consistent with this Highway Plan20

        Policy 1C: State Highway Freight System. This policy states:

             It is the policy of the State of Oregon to balance the need for movement of goods with
             other uses of the highway system, and to recognize the importance of maintaining
             efficient through movement on major truck freight routes.21

        Policy 1F: Highway Mobility Standards. This policy prescribes mobility standards for state
        transportation facilities. These standards depend on a facility’s classification. Interstate 5 is
        classified as a Interstate Highway on the National Highway System,22 a Freeway,23 and a
        Statewide Freight Route.24 The mobility standard applicable to the mainline of Interstate 5 is
        0.70.25 The mobility standard applicable to the interchange ramp terminals is 0.75.26 These
        are volume to capacity (v/c) ratios.

        Policy 2D: Public Involvement. This policy provides for the opportunity of public input into
        planning decisions.27

20
   Oregon Highway Plan, Updated in June 2006, p. 55.
21
   Ibid, p. 66.
22
   Ibid., Highway Classification Maps.
23
   Ibid., p. 120.
24
   Ibid., p. 68.
25
   Ibid., p. 83. This is the standard outside UGBs on rural lands. If no major improvements are planned for a facility,
ODOT applies OHP standards to it. This the case with the Interstate 5 mainline.
26
   Ibid. This is the standard for local interest roads outside UGBs on rural lands. If no major improvements are planned
for a highway, ODOT applies OHP standards to it. The proposed project proposes no changes to the existing interchange
ramps.
27
   Oregon Highway Plan, op. cit., p. 108.

January 22, 2008     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                     41
        Policy 2F: Traffic Safety. This policy states that “It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        continually improve safety for all users of the highway system.”28

        Policy 3A: Classification and Spacing Standards. This policy states:

             It is the policy of the State of Oregon to manage the location, spacing and type of road
             and street intersections and approach roads on state highways to assure the safe and
             efficient operation of state highways consistent with the classification of the highways.29

        The access spacing standard applicable to the ramp terminals is 1,350 feet.30

Interchange Area Management Plan, Interstate 5 Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road), 106
(Weaver Road), and 108 (Myrtle Creek). The Interchange Area Management Plan (IAMP) for
Interstate 5 at exits 103, 106 and 108,31 completed in February 2007, is part of the OHP. It provides
transportation system planning for new designs of the three interchanges at Myrtle Creek, Weaver
Road, and Riddle Road. The IAMP discusses the Weaver Road Extension Project and requires that
both the City of Myrtle Creek and Douglas County work with ODOT to implement the project in a
way that is consistent with the policies set forth within the IAMP. One of the IAMP’s goals is to “not
preclude a future bridge over the South Umpqua River connecting OR 99 to Weaver Road.”32 It
specifically requires an “adoption of an IGA [intergovernmental agreement] with ODOT in regard to
the Weaver Road bridge project and Interchange 106.”33 The IAMP states that Douglas County and
the City of Myrtle Creek must coordinate with ODOT in evaluating future land use actions that
could affect the function of the interchanges. It also supports the continued agricultural use of land
west of Interchange 106, which is currently zoned Exclusive Farm Use, as described above. Among
the “actions in the IAMP for which the local jurisdictions are responsible is:

     Implementing specific elements of the Access Management Plan for Interchange 106 (Douglas
     County) including:
      Requiring circulation plans as part of proposals for large developments that will provide
        access on secondary roadways as practical.
      Working with ODOT to relocate the intersection of Weaver Road/Aviation Drive further east
        from the interchange.
      Relocating and redesigning the Weaver Road/Aviation Drive intersection in conjunction with
        a new Weaver Road bridge.
      Undertaking any state-mandated land use actions required for bridge construction due to its
        location outside of the Urban Growth Boundary.
      Implementing improvements in the Weaver Road Corridor.34



28
   Ibid., p. 113.
29
   Ibid., p. 120.
30
   Ibid., Appendix C, Table 15.
31
   Oregon Department of Transportation, Region 3, Final Interchange Area Management Plan, Interstate 5 Interchanges
103 (Riddle), 106 (Weaver Road), and 108 (Myrtle Creek), Douglas County, Oregon, October 2006.
32
   Ibid., p. 16.
33
   Ibid., p. 81.
34
   Ibid.

42     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                 January 22, 2008
4.2.5 Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
Relevant policies are:

     Goal: to provide safe, accessible and convenient bicycling and walking facilities and to support
     and encourage increased levels of bicycling and walking.

     Action 1: Provide bikeway and walkway systems that are integrated with other
     transportation systems.

     Strategy 1A. Integrate bicycle and pedestrian facility needs into all planning, design,
     construction and maintenance activities of the Oregon Department of Transportation, local
     governments and other transportation providers.

     Strategy 1B. Retrofit existing roadways with paved shoulders or bike lanes to accommodate
     bicyclists, and with sidewalks and safe crossings to accommodate pedestrians.35

4.2.6 Oregon Aviation Plan
The Oregon Aviation Plan includes the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport as one of the state’s “core
system of airports.”36 Plan policies specifically relevant to the project are:

    “Protect airports from incompatible land uses.”37 Regarding airports, including the Myrtle Creek
     Municipal Airport, the text states that “The surrounding airspace must be free of obstructions to
     minimize safety problems for aircraft operations and the people on the ground.” The text also
     observes that “Cities and counties are responsible for ensuring compatibility of land uses and
     establishing appropriate zoning requirements around airports.”

    “Provide Oregon with an airport system that is integrated with surface transportation modes, and
     allows for a choice of modes for the movement of people and goods.”38

4.3 Douglas County

Comprehensive Plan
See the description of Douglas County Comprehensive Plan designations in the LUSA beginning on
page 25.

Transportation System Plan
Applicable Policies. The circulation plan portion of the Douglas County Transportation System Plan
(TSP), which applies to three urban incorporated areas of the County, including Tri City, states in
the policy section as a goal “to provide for safe, convenient and efficient vehicular circulation
through the urban unincorporated areas of the County.”39 Objective B under this policy is to “to
recognize and address the specific circulation problems which exist in the three plan areas.”40 The

35
   Oregon Bicycle And Pedestrian Plan, 1995, p. 21.
36
   ODOT, Oregon Aviation Plan, 2000, pp. E-9 and 10,
http://www.oregon.gov/Aviation/docs/resources/OregonAviationPlan.pdf.
37
   Ibid., p. 27.
38
   Ibid., p. 30.
39
   Ibid., p. 4-39.
40
   Ibid., p. 4-41.

January 22, 2008    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        43
third policy related to Tri City under this objective is to “promote the development of an arterial
connection between Highway 99 and Interstate 5 at the Weaver Road Interchange.”41 The
background discussion of the circulation plan states:

     As a means of reducing traffic volumes on Highway 99, a connection is proposed between Old
     Pacific Highway and I-5 at the Weaver Road Interchange. This arterial connection is proposed to
     intersect Old Pacific Highway opposite Wecks Road and would provide an alternate route for
     traffic between I-5 south of Tri City or from the Riddle area and the northern portion of Tri City
     or Myrtle Creek. And, from the north, it would provide an alternate route for traffic between I-5
     north of Myrtle Creek and most of Tri City. This arterial connection is proposed to intersect
     Highway 99 opposite Wecks Road. As part of this project the acute intersection of Wecks Road
     with Highway 99 should be modified to provide a 90 degree intersection. . .42

Other relevant policies include:

     Transportation Policy Objective B, Policy 11. Bicycle and/or pedestrian ways shall be provided
     to accommodate access from commercial or high density residential developments to adjacent
     residential areas, transit stops, and neighborhood activity centers within one-half mile of
     development in the Urban Unincorporated of Green or where Urban Growth Management
     Agreements requires (sic) improvements.”43

     Bicycle Transportation Objective A, Policy 2. Bikeways shall be provided which satisfy
     utilitarian needs by connecting major residential areas to major activity areas (recreational,
     employment, institutional, commercial) within the County.

Roadway Classification and Mobility Standards. The TSP classifies Old Highway 99 as a Major
Collector from Interstate 5 Exit 103 to Wecks Road, and as an Arterial from Wecks Road to
Interstate 5 Exit 108.44 The TSP does not explicitly apply a functional classification to the Weaver
Road Extension, but the policy language quoted above refers to it as an arterial.

Regarding arterials, the TSP states:

     The Arterial network will provide through traffic movement (including public transportation)
     and its distribution from Principal Highways on to the Collector and Local Street network. As
     with Principal Highways, Arterials provide connection between major communities in the
     County. Arterials are subject to regulation and control of parking, turning movements, entrances,
     exits, and curb uses. Access control and on street parking are a function of the number of lanes,
     land and shoulder width, design speeds, traffic volumes, and land use. Traffic volumes on major
     arterial streets can reach up to 30,000 vehicles per day.”45




41
   Ibid., p. 4-42.
42
   Douglas County Transportation System Plan, December 2006, p. 4-24.
43
   Ibid., p. 1-50
44
   Ibid., p. 1-11.
45
   Ibid., p. 1-2.

44      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report      January 22, 2008
Regarding major collectors, the TSP states:

Major collectors provide for the connection of major residential and activity centers. Such roads
primarily accommodate through traffic and channel traffic from local and minor collectors onto
streets of higher classification. Access to adjacent properties may be limited. In urban areas, major
collectors should help to establish neighborhood identity and define land use patterns. In rural areas,
major collectors connect minor rural communities, provide secondary access between major
communities and provide access to major employment, recreational and rural residential areas.
Traffic volumes on major collector streets generally can range up to 10,000 vehicles per day.”46

The mobility standard applicable to Old Highway 99 from Exit 103 to Wecks Road (as a major
collector) is a v/c ratio of 0.90. The standard applicable to Old Highway 99 from Wecks Road to
Exit 108 (as an arterial) is 0.85.47

4.4 City of Myrtle Creek
City of Myrtle Creek policies do not apply to the project, because the land the project would directly
impact is outside city limits and therefore outside the City’s jurisdiction.




46
     Ibid.
47
     Ibid., p. 1-3.

January 22, 2008      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   45
5. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The project would have direct and indirect effects on land use. This section addresses direct, indirect,
cumulative, and construction effects on land use.

5.1 Direct Effects
Direct land use effects are defined as the conversion of land from its existing use to roadway use.

5.1.1 No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would have no direct effects on land use.

5.1.2 Build Alternative
The project would occupy a total of 4 acres of land not now used for roadways. This is the project’s
“footprint” other than where it crosses the South Umpqua River and where Old Highway 99 already
exists. Thus, the project would convert this amount of land to roadway use from is present use.
“Footprint” is defined here as extending to the outer edge of land acquired and retained permanently
as right of way, including land acquired for drainage. It does not include land for which permanent
easements would be acquired. This is because land subject to easements can be used for other, non-
roadway purposes, subject to the easements, and thus would not be converted to roadway use. Such
easements would be for roadway slopes, drainage, inspection and/or maintenance.

Tables 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3 show the existing use, comprehensive plan designations, and zoning of the 4
acres. The land listed as “not subject to comprehensive plan” in Table 5-2 and “not subject to
zoning” in Table 5-3 is the land owned in trust for the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of
Indians. As mentioned on page 25, these lands are not subject to the Douglas County Comprehensive
Plan or County zoning.


                       Table 5-1: Land Converted to Roadway Use by Existing Use
                                                (acres)
            Use                           No-Build Alternative           Build Alternative
            Residential                            0                           1.86
            Commercial                             0                           2.04
            Agricultural                           0                           0.10
                              Total                0                            4.0
            Source: MB&G, January 2008.




January 22, 2008    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report      47
               Table 5-2: Land Converted to Roadway Use by Comprehensive Plan Designation
                                                 (acres)
              Use                                          No-Build Alternative           Build Alternative
              Low Density Residential                                0                          0.83
              Medium Density Residential                             0                          1.03
              Tourist Commercial                                     0                          0.12
              Community Commercial                                   0                          1.91
              Limited Commercial                                     0                          0.01
              Not Subject to Comprehensive Plan                      0                          0.10
              Total                                                  0                           4.0
              Source: MB&G, January 2008.




                               Table 5-3: Land Converted to Roadway Use by Zoning
                                                     (acres)
              Use                                          No-Build Alternative           Build Alternative
              Suburban Residential                                   0                          0.83
              Single-Family Residential                              0                          1.03
              Tourist Commercial                                     0                          0.12
              Community Commercial                                   0                          1.91
              Not Subject to Zoning                                  0                          0.10
                                                  Total              0                           4.0
              Source: MB&G, January 2008.



5.2 Indirect Effects
Indirect land use effects are changes in land use that highway projects encourage by altering travel
times to and from areas, altering property access, and changing traffic volumes. “Indirect effects of
transportation projects typically occur through the action of an intermediary, usually a household or
business, acting in response to anticipated or actual changes in transportation system performance.”48

5.2.1 No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would have no indirect land use effects. Changes in land use in the LUSA
would likely be limited to the gradual infill development of vacant properties in the portion east of
Old Highway 99 and outside the Floodplain Overlay Zone. This is because this overlay zone on both
sides of the river (as shown on Figure 4-4 on page 37) and the resource zoning on the west side of
the river (as shown on Figure 4-3 on page 35) would restrict new development. Flood hazard may
also constrain development of the tribal trust land on the west side of the river, which is not subject
to County land use regulations.

5.2.2      Build Alternative

Residential Land Use
The Build Alternative would likely increase the amount of infill residential development in the
portion of the LUSA east of Old Highway 99, compared to the No-Build Alternative, but not greatly.
Highway projects affect residential development primarily by reducing travel time to employment
48
     Arvin, Uri, et al., Forecasting Indirect Land Use Effects of Transportation Projects, December 2007, p. 11.

48        DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                     January 22, 2008
centers. Roseburg is the largest employment center in the labor market of which the project area is
part. The project would reduce travel time between Roseburg and the intersection of Old Highway
99 and Wecks Road only modestly.49 Comparison of the map of existing land use on page 27 and the
zoning map on page 35 indicates capacity for substantial amounts of additional residential
development which would be consistent with applicable plans and zoning. Residential development
beyond the existing UGB unlikely because of this capacity, capacity for additional residential
development in the Tri City area outside the LUSA, restrictions on the expansion of UGBs in
Oregon, and restrictions on residential development outside UGBs.

Commercial Land Use
The Build Alternative would result in only limited conversion of land to commercial use. On the
west side of the river, it would make the tribal trust land more attractive for commercial
development because it would be directly accessible from the Tri City area, as well as from
Interstate 5. However, this land already has direct access from Interstate 5 and its location in a
floodplain would make it more expensive to develop and more difficult to finance than development
outside a floodplain. On the east side of the river, the Build Alternative would make the small
amount of vacant commercially-zoned land near the intersection of Old Highway 99 and Wecks
Road more likely to be developed or accelerate its development, compared to the No-Build
Alternative. Other than these consequences, its effect would be limited because:

    The land zoned for commercial development on the east side of the river lacks the proximity to
     and visibility from Interstate 5 that would make it attractive for development that relies on easy
     access from the Interstate.
    The Floodplain Overlay zone would deter development. It would add development expense and
     make securing financing more difficult.
    The amount of land zoned for commercial use is too small to accommodate any substantial
     commercial development, such as a motel.
    Expansion of the area zoned for commercial development is constrained by adjoining residential
     uses because residents often resist expansion of adjoining commercial zoning.

While the Build Alternative would have limited effect on the conversion of land from its present use
to commercial, it might foster the redevelopment of some existing commercial properties. Project
improvements, especially the traffic signal at the intersection of the Weaver Road Extension and Old
Highway 99 and the sidewalks, bike lanes, and median on Old Highway 99, would make the
commercially-zoned land near the intersection more attractive for redevelopment. Elevated traffic
volumes would increase the attractiveness for retail uses. In particular, the project could make
financially feasible the redevelopment of the land occupied by the dated structures on the east side of
Old Highway 99 and by the RV park, even considering the extra costs associated with being in the
Floodplain Overlay zone. However, for these effects to occur, property owners would have to either
be motivated and financially able to undertake redevelopment or sell to buyers who are.


49
  The existing non-peak hour travel time from the I-5/Harvard Boulevard Interchange in Roseburg to Wecks Road via
Interstate 5, the Myrtle Creek Interchange, and Old Highway 99 is about 20 minutes. Were the Build Alternative in place
today, the travel time to Wecks Road via Interstate 5, the Weaver Road Interchange, and the Weaver Road Extension
would be about 17.5 minutes, a savings of about 2.5 minutes, or 14 percent. Peak-hour travel time savings would be
higher and would grow over time, as traffic volumes and congestion increase. However, while future travel times have
not been modeled, even by the design year of 2027, the savings would probably not exceed about 30 percent, or 10
minutes.

January 22, 2008     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                    49
5.3 Cumulative Effects
A cumulative effect is “is the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact
of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.”50

5.3.1 No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would have no cumulative effects.

5.3.2 Build Alternative
The Build Alternative would have no discernable cumulative effects. The “past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions,” in combination with which the Build Alternative would have
cumulative effects, are the other on-going and planned transportation projects listed in the
description of the No-Build Alternative on page 16, above. These are mainly bridge replacements in
the general area and street construction projects elsewhere in the Tri City area, outside the LUSA. As
such, none of the projects would alter access to, traffic volumes in, or transportation improvements
in the LUSA.

5.4 Construction Effects
The construction of the Build Alternative is unlikely to have a long-term impact on land uses.
Construction impacts such as access changes and detours would impose short-term impacts on
businesses and residents, but those impacts would be temporary, lasting no longer than the duration
of construction. Construction staging areas would temporarily use some land in the LUSA, but the
land would be available for its allowed use after the completion of the project.

5.5 Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies

5.5.1 State of Oregon

Oregon Statewide Planning Program
Statewide Planning Goals and Transportation Planning Rule. See page 39. The Statewide
Planning Goals do not apply to the project. The goals would apply only if Douglas County had to
amend its comprehensive plan to make the project consistent with it, or if the TPR required a goal
exception for it. As explained below, the project is consistent with Douglas County’s Transportation
System Plan. The TPR does not require a goal exception because the project is not located on rural
lands subject to the Statewide Planning Program. On the west side of the river, it crosses land owned
in trust for the Cow Creek Band of the Umpqua Tribe of Indians. Such lands are outside the
jurisdiction of the Statewide Planning Program. On the east side of the river, the project is located
within the UGB.51 The property boundary of the tribal trust land extends to the middle of the South
Umpqua River from the west52 and the UGB also follows the middle of the river. Therefore, the
project does not enter rural “land,” even over the river. See the memorandum in the appendix.


50
   Council on Environmental Quality, Regulations for Implementing NEPA, Section 1508 Terminology and Index (40
CFR 1508.7-8).
51
   As proposed, an easement for inspection and maintenance on the north side of the extension would extend about 15
feet outside the UGB, into rural lands. However, no physical improvements would occupy this land and ownership of the
affected land would remain unchanged. Therefore, it is understood that the easement would not trigger the need for a
goal exception of the type referenced on page 39.
52
   The State of Oregon does not consider the land under the South Umpqua River to be publicly-owned, because it is not
navigable. See http://www.oregon.gov/DSL/NAV/navigwaterways.shtml.

50     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                  January 22, 2008
State Agency Coordination Program. See page 39. As stated above, the project would require
neither the amendment of the Douglas County Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with it nor an
exception to Statewide Planning Goals. No amendments to the Douglas County Land Use and
Development Ordinance are required (see page 61, below). Therefore, ODOT may issue a revised
environmental assessment in compliance with ODOT’s State Agency Coordination Program.

Oregon Transportation Plan
Regarding the policies quoted on page 40 as applicable to the project:

        Policy 2.1 – Capacity and Operational Efficiency. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        manage the transportation system to improve its capacity and operational efficiency for the
        long term benefit of people and goods movement.

    The Build Alternative would improve the transportation system’s capacity and operational
    efficiency by:

           enabling the use of Old Highway 99 in instances where Interstate 5 is blocked between
            Interchange 106 (Weaver Road) and either Interchange 103 (Riddle Road) or Interchange
            108 (Myrtle Creek) Interchanges and by reducing out-of-direction travel between
            Interstate 5 and the LUSA.

           causing intersections to meet ODOT and Douglas County mobility standards, which
            would not meet the standards under the No-Build Alternative (see the Traffic and Safety
            Technical Report).

        Policy 4.1 – Environmentally Responsible Transportation System. It is the policy of the State
        of Oregon to provide a transportation system that is environmentally responsible and
        encourages conservation and protection of natural resources.

    The Build Alternative is environmentally responsible and conserves and protects natural
    resources in its design. For documentation, see the technical reports on air quality, biological
    resources, and water resources.

        Policy 4.3 – Creating Communities. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to increase access
        to goods and services and promote health by encouraging the development of compact
        communities and neighborhoods that integrate residential, commercial and employment land
        uses to help make shorter trips, transit, walking and bicycling feasible. Integrate features that
        support the use of transportation choices.

    The Build Alternative would help achieve this policy in several ways. First, it would support the
    commercial area at the intersection of Old Highway 99 and Wecks Road as the center of a
    compact neighborhood, fostering the integration of residential and commercial land uses. Second,
    the inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99 and the traffic
    signal at the intersection would support walking and bicycling. The provision of space on the
    extension for future sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development
    adjacent to the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust lands, also would help achieve
    this policy.



January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        51
        Policy 5.1 – Safety. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to continually improve the safety
        and security of all modes and transportation facilities for system users including operators,
        passengers, pedestrians, recipients of goods and services, and property owners.

     The project would improve safety in the following ways:

            It would shift traffic from Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek),
             thereby reducing the amount of traffic exposed to the high crash rates near Interchange
             108 and the substandard deceleration and acceleration lane lengths of the ramps at both
             interchanges.53

            The left-turn lane from Old Highway 99 to Wecks Road would help reduce the number of
             rear-end and turning movement collisions along Old Highway 99 between Interchanges
             103 (Riddle Road) and 108 (Myrtle Creek).54

            The traffic signal at the intersection of the Weaver Road extension, Old Highway 99, and
             Wecks Road would improve pedestrian safety at that location.55

        Policy 7.1 – A Coordinated Transportation System. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        work collaboratively with other jurisdictions and agencies with the objective of removing
        barriers so the transportation system can function as one system.

     As referenced on page 15, ODOT has worked in collaboration with Douglas County and other
     jurisdictions and agencies to develop the proposed project.

        Policy 7.3 – Public Involvement and Consultation. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
        involve Oregonians to the fullest practical extent in transportation planning and
        implementation in order to deliver a transportation system that meets the diverse needs of the
        state.

The public involvement program for the proposed project meets this policy. As referenced on page
15, a citizens advisory committee has helped guide the project, including in the identification and
screening of alternatives. In addition, ODOT and Douglas County hosted public open houses on the
project July 10 and September 19, 2007. Over 80 citizens attended the July meeting and about 30
citizens attended the September meeting.

1999 Oregon Highway Plan. Regarding the policies quoted beginning on page 41 as applicable to
the project:

        Policy 1B. Land Use and Transportation. This policy recognizes the role of both State and
        local governments related to the
            state highway system:

                     State and local government must work together to provide safe and efficient roads
                      for livability and economic viability for all citizens.
53
   DKS Associates, Draft Traffic and Safety Technical Report, January 18, 2008, p. 5-11.
54
   Ibid.
55
   Ibid.

52      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report       January 22, 2008
     As referenced on page 15, ODOT has worked in collaboration with Douglas County and other
     jurisdictions and agencies to develop the proposed project.

                    State and local government must share responsibility for the road system.

     In addition to collaborating with ODOT in the development of the project, Douglas County is
     contributing $6 million to the cost of the project, which is above the required minimum.

                    State and local government must work collaboratively in planning and decision-
                     making relating to transportation system management.

     As referenced on page 15, ODOT has worked in collaboration with Douglas County and other
     jurisdictions and agencies to develop the proposed project.

            It is the policy of the State of Oregon to coordinate land use and transportation decisions
            to efficiently use public infrastructure investments to:

                    Maintain the mobility and safety of the highway system;
                    Foster compact development patterns in communities;
                    Encourage the availability and use of transportation alternatives;
                    Enhance livability and economic competitiveness; and
                    Support acknowledged regional, city and county transportation system plans that
                     are consistent with this Highway Plan56

     As discussed in the section on project consistency with the Douglas County Comprehensive Plan,
     below, the project is consistent with the County’s Transportation System Plan, which the LCDC
     has “acknowledged” as consistent with the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals. This means that it
     complies with the TPR, which requires that land use and transportation plans support each other.

Policy 1C: State Highway Freight System. This policy states:

     It is the policy of the State of Oregon to balance the need for movement of goods with other uses
     of the highway system, and to recognize the importance of maintaining efficient through
     movement on major truck freight routes.57

Enhancing “freight mobility to and within Myrtle Creek, Tri City, and adjacent communities” is
among the purposes of the project, as stated on page 13. The project would improve freight mobility
by:

        providing turning radii that would accommodate most trucks used for freight movement. 58


56
   Oregon Highway Plan, op. cit., p. 55.
57
   Ibid, p. 66.
58
   The proposed turning radii at the intersection of the Weaver Road extension and Old Highway 99 would accommodate
category WB67 trucks, the largest trucks normally used for freight movement, and the turning radii at the new
intersection of the Weaver Road extension and Aviation Drive would accommodate category WB50 trucks, which
includes most trucks used for freight.

January 22, 2008    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report                 53
        providing an additional route for truck movement between Interstate 5 and the Tri City area.
         Tight turning radii at Interchange 108 (Myrtle Creek) constrain its use for freight movement.

        providing another option for truck traffic to detour between Interstate 5 and Old Highway 99
         in cases of congestion or incidents along either facility. For example, if there were to be an
         accident on Interstate 5 southbound between Exits 108 and 106, today Interstate 5 traffic
         would only be detoured along Old Highway 99 between Exits 108 and 106. This traffic
         would need to remain on Old Highway 99 between Exits 108 and 103, a longer detour.

         Policy 1F: Highway Mobility Standards. As stated on page 41, Interstate 5 is classified as a
         Interstate Highway on the National Highway System, a Freeway, and a Statewide Freight
         Route. As stated on the same page, the mobility standard applicable to the mainline of
         Interstate 5 is 0.70 and the mobility standard applicable to the interchange ramp terminals is
         0.75.

     The Build Alternative would meet the OHP mobility standard for the ramp terminals in 2027.59
     The v/c ratio for the Interstate 5 mainline has not been forecasted.

         Policy 2D: Public Involvement. This policy provides for the opportunity of public input into
         planning decisions.60

As discussed above, the public involvement program for the proposed project meets this policy. As
referenced on page 15, a citizens advisory committee has helped guide the project, including in the
identification and screening of alternatives. In addition, ODOT and Douglas County hosted public
open houses on the project July 10 and September 19, 2007. Over 80 citizens attended the July
meeting and about 30 citizens attended the September meeting.

         Policy 2F: Traffic Safety. This policy states that “It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
         continually improve safety for all users of the highway system.”61

     The project would improve safety in the ways described on page 52.

     Policy 3A: Classification and Spacing Standards. This policy states:

         It is the policy of the State of Oregon to manage the location, spacing and type of road and
         street intersections and approach roads on state highways to assure the safe and efficient
         operation of state highways consistent with the classification of the highways.62

     The access spacing standard applicable to the ramp terminals is 1,350 feet.63

     The project would move the intersection of Aviation Drive and Weaver Road eastward to
     increase the separation between it and intersection of the northbound exit ramp and Weaver Road.
     However, the resulting spacing would be 244 feet, still below the standard of 1,350 feet. To

59
   DKS Associates, Draft Traffic and Safety Technical Report, January 18, 2008, Table 5-3.
60
   Oregon Highway Plan, op. cit., p. 108.
61
   Ibid., p. 113.
62
   Ibid., p. 120.
63
   Ibid., Appendix C, Table 15.

54       DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report        January 22, 2008
     proceed with the project, ODOT would need to issue a “deviation” from the standard, which
     would provide a justification for not meeting the standard.64

Interchange Area Management Plan, Interstate 5 Interchanges 103 (Riddle Road), 106
(Weaver Road), and 108 (Myrtle Creek). The Build Alternative is consistent with the provisions
of this IAMP, as described on page 42. In particular, the project would relocate the Weaver
Road/Aviation Drive intersection, as the IAMP calls for. ODOT and Douglas County would need to
enter into an IGA regarding the project.

Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
Regarding the policies quoted beginning on page 43 as applicable to the project:

     Goal: to provide safe, accessible and convenient bicycling and walking facilities and to support
     and encourage increased levels of bicycling and walking.

     Action 1: Provide bikeway and walkway systems that are integrated with other
     transportation systems.

     Strategy 1A. Integrate bicycle and pedestrian facility needs into all planning, design,
     construction and maintenance activities of the Oregon Department of Transportation, local
     governments and other transportation providers.

     Strategy 1B. Retrofit existing roadways with paved shoulders or bike lanes to accommodate
     bicyclists, and with sidewalks and safe crossings to accommodate pedestrians.65

As stated above, the inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99
and the traffic signal at the intersection would support walking and bicycling. The provision of space
for sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development adjacent to the Myrtle
Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust lands, also would help achieve this policy.

Oregon Aviation Plan
Regarding the policies quoted beginning on page 43 as applicable to the project:

        “Protect airports from incompatible land uses.”66 Regarding airports, including the Myrtle
         Creek Municipal Airport, the text states that “The surrounding airspace must be free of
         obstructions to minimize safety problems for aircraft operations and the people on the
         ground.” The text also observes that “Cities and counties are responsible for ensuring
         compatibility of land uses and establishing appropriate zoning requirements around airports.”

The project would comply with the prohibition on obstructions. The provisions of the Douglas
County Airport Overlay zone would not apply to the project because, where the zone would
otherwise affect the project, the alignment would be located on tribal trust land. County zoning does
not apply. However, the proposed project design would avoid any associated structures (specifically,
light standards) from exceeding 35 feet in height, which is what the overlay zone would require.67
64
   See 734-051-0135.
65
   Oregon Bicycle And Pedestrian Plan, 1995, p. 21.
66
   Ibid., p. 27.
67
   See LUDO, op. cit., section 3.35.800(3)(c).

January 22, 2008     DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report       55
        “Provide Oregon with an airport system that is integrated with surface transportation modes,
         and allows for a choice of modes for the movement of people and goods.”68

The Build Alternative would improve the integration of the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport with
surface transportation by adding a link to the local roadway system.

Douglas County Transportation System Plan
The Build Alternative would provide the extension of Weaver Road over the South Umpqua River to
intersect with Old Highway 99 called for by policies in the Douglas County Transportation System
Plan (TSP). The policy section of the circulation plan portion of the TSP, which applies to three
urban incorporated areas of the County, including Tri City, states as a goal “to provide for safe,
convenient and efficient vehicular circulation through the urban unincorporated areas of the
County.” Objective B under this policy is to “to recognize and address the specific circulation
problems which exist in the three plan areas.” The third policy related to Tri City under this
objective is to “promote the development of an arterial connection between Highway 99 and
Interstate 5 at the Weaver Road Interchange.” The background discussion states:

     As a means of reducing traffic volumes on Highway 99, a connection is proposed between Old
     Pacific Highway and I-5 at the Weaver Road Interchange. This arterial connection is proposed to
     intersect Old Pacific Highway opposite Wecks Road and would provide an alternate route for
     traffic between I-5 south of Tri City or from the Riddle area and the northern portion of Tri City
     or Myrtle Creek. And, from the north, it would provide an alternate route for traffic between I-5
     north of Myrtle Creek and most of Tri City. This arterial connection is proposed to intersect
     Highway 99 opposite Wecks Road. As part of this project the acute intersection of Wecks Road
     with Highway 99 should be modified to provide a 90 degree intersection. . .

The TSP classifies Old Highway 99 as a Major Collector from Interstate 5 Exit 103 to Wecks Road,
and as an Arterial from Wecks Road to Interstate 5 Exit 108.69 The mobility standard applicable to
Old Highway 99 from Exit 103 to Wecks Road (as a major collector) is a v/c ratio of 0.90. The
standard applicable to Old Highway 99 from Wecks Road to Exit 108 (as an arterial) is 0.85.70 The
forecasted 2027 v/c ratio for the intersection of Weaver Road and Old Highway 99 is 0.74,71 which
meets the standards.

Other TSP policies quoted above as applicable to the project are:

     Transportation Policy Objective B, Policy 11. Bicycle and/or pedestrian ways shall be provided
     to accommodate access from commercial or high density residential developments to adjacent
     residential areas, transit stops, and neighborhood activity centers within one-half mile of
     development in the Urban Unincorporated of Green or where Urban Growth Management
     Agreements requires (sic) improvements.”72



68
   Ibid., p. 30.
69
   Ibid., p. 1-11.
70
   Ibid., p. 1-3.
71
   DKS Associates, op. cit., Table 5-3.
72
   Ibid., p. 1-50

56       DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   January 22, 2008
     Bicycle Transportation Objective A, Policy 2. Bikeways shall be provided which satisfy
     utilitarian needs by connecting major residential areas to major activity areas (recreational,
     employment, institutional, commercial) within the County.

The inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99 and the traffic
signal at the intersection would meet these policies. The provision of space on the extension for
future sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development adjacent to the Myrtle
Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust land. However, the proposed project design would avoid
any associated structures (specifically, light standards) from exceeding 35 feet in height, which is
what the overlay zone would require.73

        “Provide Oregon with an airport system that is integrated with surface transportation modes,
         and allows for a choice of modes for the movement of people and goods.”74

The Build Alternative would improve the integration of the Myrtle Creek Municipal Airport with
surface transportation by adding a link to the local roadway system.

5.5.2 Douglas County
Transportation System Plan
The TSP is the portion of the Douglas County Comprehensive Plan that applies to the proposed
project.

Applicable Policies. The Build Alternative would provide the extension of Weaver Road over the
South Umpqua River to intersect with Old Highway 99 called for by the policies quoted beginning
on page 43.

Other TSP policies quoted on page 12as applicable to the project are:

     Transportation Policy Objective B, Policy 11. Bicycle and/or pedestrian ways shall be provided
     to accommodate access from commercial or high density residential developments to adjacent
     residential areas, transit stops, and neighborhood activity centers within one-half mile of
     development in the Urban Unincorporated of Green or where Urban Growth Management
     Agreements requires (sic) improvements.”75

     Bicycle Transportation Objective A, Policy 2. Bikeways shall be provided which satisfy
     utilitarian needs by connecting major residential areas to major activity areas (recreational,
     employment, institutional, commercial) within the County.

The inclusion of bike lanes and sidewalks in the improvements to Old Highway 99 and the traffic
signal at the intersection would meet these policies. The provision of space on the extension for
future sidewalks and bike lanes, when warranted in the future by development adjacent to the Myrtle
Creek Municipal Airport and tribal trust lands, also would help achieve the policies.




73
   See LUDO, op. cit., section 3.35.800(3)(c).
74
   Ibid., p. 30.
75
   Ibid., p. 1-50

January 22, 2008      DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report    57
Roadway Classification and Mobility Standards. The forecasted 2027 v/c ratio for the intersection
of Weaver Road and Old Highway 99 is 0.74,76 which meets the applicable mobility standards in the
TSP. As stated on page 44, the mobility standard applicable to Old Highway 99 from Exit 103 to
Wecks Road (as a major collector) is a v/c ratio of 0.90 and the standard applicable to Old Highway
99 from Wecks Road to Exit 108 (as an arterial) is 0.85.77




76
     DKS Associates, op. cit., Table 5-3.
77
     Ibid., p. 1-3.

58        DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   January 22, 2008
6. POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES
Because the project would not have any adverse land use impacts and is consistent with applicable
plans and policies, there is no need for mitigation measures.




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report     59
7. PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
According to the Douglas County Planning Department, it would need to issue only floodplain
certification for the project.78 This is because:

    Project improvements would not require conditional use approval under the zoning regulations
     applicable to the land they would occupy. The land on the west side of the river is tribal trust
     land. As stated on page 31, it is exempt from County regulation. The land on the east side of the
     river is within the UGB for Myrtle Creek and the Tri City area and is zoned Tourist Commercial
     and Community Commercial. While the regulations for these zones do not mention highway
     improvements as a use allowed outright,79 the County considers highway improvements within
     an urban area as essential urban infrastructure and thus permitted outright.
    The project would be required to obtain from the Planning Department floodplain certification
     for the pillar in the river or any other permanent structure in the floodplain.80
    At the time the Planning Department considers the floodplain certification, it would consult with
     the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to the Riparian Vegetation Corridor
     Overlay Zone regulations and defer to that agency.
    While the Airport Impact Overlay zone applies to a portion of the project on the east side of the
     river (see Figure 4-4 on page 37), because the County Public Works Department is developing
     the project, the Planning Department would not issue approval under the overlay zone
     regulations. Instead, it would conduct a review of the project and send to the Public Works
     Department a memo stating the restrictions the zone applies.
    While the Design Review Overlay Zone covers the land project improvements would occupy on
     the east side of the river, it applies only to structures that are occupied and does not apply to a
     bridge or other urban infrastructure. Therefore, Planning Department approval under zone
     regulations would not be required.




78
   Personal communication with Mark Bernard, Senior Planner, Douglas County Planning Department, 1/9/08.
79
   Douglas County Land Use and Development Ordinance, Sections 3.16.050 and 3.17.050.
80
   Ibid., Section 3.30.270.

January 22, 2008    DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report           61
8. REFERENCES

Arvin, Uri, et al. December 2007. Forecasting Indirect Land Use Effects of Transportation Projects.

Mark Bernard, pers. comm., senior planner, Douglas County Planning Department, January 8, 2008.

Council on Environmental Quality. Regulations for Implementing NEPA, Section 1508 Terminology
         and Index (40 CFR 1508.7-8)

DKS Associates. January 18, 2008. Draft Traffic and Safety Technical Report.

Douglas County. December 6, 2006. Comprehensive Plan.

Douglas County. Undated. Land Use and Development Ordinance.
        http://www.co.douglas.or.us/planning/tbl_cont.asp.

Douglas County. December 2006. Transportation System Plan.

ECONorthwest, et al. April 2001. A Guidebook for Evaluation the Indirect Land Use and Growth
       Impacts of Highway Improvements.

Louis Berger Group, Inc. 2002. Desk Reference for Estimating the Indirect Effects of Proposed
        Transportation Projects, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 466.

Myrtle Creek. July 19, 1983. City of, Creek Comprehensive Plan.

ODOT. October 2006. Interchange 103, 106, 108 Interchange Area Management Plan.

ODOT. 2000. Oregon Aviation Plan.
       http://www.oregon.gov/Aviation/docs/resources/OregonAviationPlan.pdf.

ODOT. 1995. Oregon Bicycle And Pedestrian Plan.

ODOT. 2003. Highway Design Manual.
       http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/ENGSERVICES/hwy_manuals.shtml.

ODOT. 2006. Oregon Highway Plan.
       http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/docs/orhwyplan/hwyplan/PolicyElement.pdf.

ODOT. 2006. Oregon Transportation Plan.
       http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/ortransplanupdate.shtml#Oregon_Transportation_Pl
       an___Adopted_September_20__2006.

Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. 1999. Land Use Impacts of Transportation: A
         Guidebook, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 423A.




January 22, 2008   DRAFT – Weaver Road Extension Project Planning and Land Use Technical Report   63

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:6/30/2012
language:English
pages:67