New Search
FINAL 2008-2011 STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM <br />• Interchange Area Management Plan or Access Management Plan <br />• Location Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Record of Decision (ROD) <br />• Design EIS ROD <br />• Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) <br />• Right of way acquisition <br />• Advance plans (or any other applicable project development design milestone) <br />• Plans, specifications and estimates (PS&E) <br />B.2. Development STIP Prioritization Factors Footnotes <br />ZD-STIP Projects that Best Support the Oregon Highway Plan Policies <br />Oregon Highway Plan policies that are applicable to D-STIP projects may include but are not necessarily <br />limited to the following (Table 1): <br />• lA, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1F, 1G, 1H, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2E, 2F, 2G, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, 4E, and SA <br />3Funding for D-STIP Projects <br />A funding scenario should be identified through construction, though not necessarily guaranteed. Con- <br />gressional high priority projects would fall into this category. <br />4Leverage and Public Benefit for D-STIP Projects <br />ACTS, MPOs and regional or statewide advisory groups should evaluate how proposed projects leverage <br />additional funding or collateral community benefits and make wise and efficient use of infrastructure and <br />natural resources. Those making project recommendations should pursue an agenda to accomplish lever- <br />age or community benefits although specific benefits might not always be known at the D-STIP stage. <br />Examples of leverage and public beneEts for D-STIP modernization projects could include where appli- <br />cable, but are not limited to the following: <br />• Other funding contributions, such as additional federal funds, local matching funds or provision <br />of project right of way, private funding. <br />• Bundling with other infrastructure projects (provided there is no adverse affect on project readi- <br />ness). <br />• Environmental enhancement, such as culvert replacement and improved drainage. <br />• Transfer of jurisdiction from state to local control. <br />• Leveraging additional funds that contribute to transportation system effectiveness, revitalization <br />of the downtown or mainstreet, etc. <br />• Direct benefits to multiple modes of travel. This would include local efforts to accommodate <br />non-auto modal opportunities. <br />• Local circulation improvements that support and complement the state highway project. <br />• Improvements in Oregon's economy by addressing transportation challenges. <br />• Potential for collecting toll revenues. <br />• Projects that implement other innovative finance techniques. <br />• Would facilitate public and private investment that creates or sustains jobs. <br />This determination must be considered within the capacity of the community on a case by case basis. <br />Page 344 <br />