New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
2010-2013 STIP Draft
COE
>
PW
>
Admin
>
Execs
>
Executive non-confidential
>
Historical
>
2010-2013 STIP Draft
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2009 11:13:52 AM
Creation date
6/1/2009 12:22:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Exec
PW_Division_Exec
Administration
PWA_Project_Area
ODOT
PW_Subject
STIP
Document_Date
10/1/2008
External_View
No
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
274
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
DRAFT 2010-2013 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IlVIPROVEMENT PROGRAM <br />'.__:,.! <br />~ B. Modernization <br />As stated in the Oregon Highway Plan, "The primary goal of modernization projects is to add <br />capacity to the highway system in order to facilitate existing traffic and/or accommodate pro- <br />jected traffic growth. Modernization means capacity-adding projects including HOV lanes and <br />off-system improvements. Projects in this category include major widening of lanes or bridges, <br />,- ~ and the addition of lanes, rest areas or entire facilities." Where a culvert is replaced with a <br />bridge due to environmental analysis concluding that this is necessary, the project is not consid- <br />ered modernization. <br />B.1. Construction STIP Eligibility Criteria for Modernization Footnotes <br />SConsistency with Comprehensive Plans and Transportation System Plans (TSP) <br />The proposal must show that the project is consistent with the applicable adopted comprehensive <br />plan or transportation system plan as a planned facility, including land use decisions that estab- <br />lish need, mode, function and general location, including goal exceptions, where required. If <br />consistency cannot be demonstrated the project submission will describe how the inconsistency <br />will be addressed, including changes to the project, TSP and/or comprehensive plan and when <br />they need to be completed. In such cases, the ACT or regional or statewide advisory group may <br />recommend that the project be included in the D-STIP, and request that Transportation Planning <br />Rule issues be addressed. <br />Proposed projects from within MPOs shall be identified in fiscally constrained Regional Trans- <br />portation Plans and shall meet air quality conformity requirements. <br />6Consistency with Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) Policy 1G, Action 1G.1, on Major Im- <br />provements <br />In order to demonstrate that a project is consistent with OHP Policy 1G, Action 1G.1, the pro- <br />posal must show that the project and/or the TSP clearly addressed the prioritization criteria found <br />in Action 1 G.1 of the OHP. <br />~, ? Where needed to achieve consistency with the above-noted Oregon Highway Plan policy, the <br />-:' ACTS, MPOs, or regional or statewide advisory groups, with ODOT assistance, shall negotiate <br />conditions for project approval with an applicant. These conditions, if not addressed as the pro- <br />ject proceeded through the D-STIP if applicable, shall be attached to the application approved by <br />- ' the ACT, MPO or regional or statewide advisory group, shall be as specific as possible given the <br />~' '! stage of development of the project, and may include the following: <br />~. <br />• Interchange Area Management Plan or Access Management Plan, <br />• Highway segment designations, <br />• Needed local street improvements, <br />• Traffic management plans, <br />• Land use plan designations, <br />• Other similar conditions. <br />Page 213 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.