Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Site Image

HWY 199 - Expressway Project
Hwy. 199 Expressway Project Alternatives Considered
In the May 2005 meetings, the CAC and PDT reviewed a starting point of staff concepts and created new concepts for both the east and west section. The total of these concepts were the basis for the technical analysis and evaluation against the approved goals and objected created by the CAC and PDT. For the purpose of creating the concepts, the study area was broken up into 2 distinct sections to reflect the unique needs of each area. West is the higher speed and generally more rural feel section of highway from Midway Ave to Dowell, with much more severe accidents. East is the somewhat lower speed but much more congested section from Dowell to Tussey Lane. The east section has a higher number of accidents but lower severity. After refining and selecting the alternatives for additional study, the east and west sections will be combined back together for further analysis.
 
Current Options being considered   |   West Section Alternatives   |   East Section Alternatives
 

Options Being Consider

For evaluation purposes for the Environmental Assessment, the alternatives were renamed to reflect the entire alternative with the east and west options together.
West Alternative East Alternative New Concept Name for technical evaluation
West-6East-1Concept A
West-6Concept CConcept C
 
Concept A:
Two lane access road constructed from Allen Creek Road to the YMCA and Fairgrounds. From Fairgrounds east, construction of road and actual alignment would not be set unless this is found to be part of the overall solution for the ‘South Y’ interchange planning study scheduled to start in 2007.
  • Signals remain on US 199 at Ringette and Allen Creek intersections.
  • The Redwood Ave slip ramp from westbound US 199 to Allen Creek remains under different configuration.
  • A new signal at the realigned Allen Creek Road/Redwood Avenue/Access Road intersection.
  • Remove Fairgrounds and Redwood Ave signals on US 199. Entry becomes right in-right out.
  • Highway 199 is three lanes in each direction from Tussey to Allen Creek.

Concept C:

From Fairgrounds east, construction of road and actual alignment would not be set unless this is found to be part of the overall solution for the ‘South Y’ interchange planning study scheduled to start in 2007.
  • Reduces right of way impacts to Fairgrounds, compared to other concepts, by providing access road to YMCA and Fairgrounds. From Fairgrounds east, construction of road and actual alignment would not be set unless this is found to be part of the overall solution for the ‘South Y’ interchange planning study scheduled to start in 2007.
  • With removal of Fairgrounds signal, intersection becomes right in-right out.
  • Westbound Highway 199 traffic to Redwood Ave. takes new ramp closer at Allen Creek Road intersection.
  • Provides access to businesses in the Redwood Ave.-Allen Creek Road area.
  • Highway 199 is three lanes in each direction from Tussey to Allen Creek

West concept- Dowell west to Midway
  • Curb median separating traffic from Dowell Road to Rogue Community College (RCC) "west" entrance then tall concrete barrier from RCC west to Midway
  • Willow lane treatment will remain and a similar treatment into RCC. U-turns will be permitted at Dowell, Hubbard, and Midway.
  • Improve Hubbard Rd. extension south to Demaray
  • Future signal at Hubbard Road and US 199
  • New multi-use path on the north side of US 199 from Hubbard to Dowell
 

West Section Alternatives

At the June meeting, the CAC and PDT voted to combine the similar alternatives into new alternatives labeled West-6 and West-7 based on the similarity of components. West-6 and West-7 were then voted on with West-2 and West-4 to determine which alternatives to forward for additional study. Ultimately only one alternative for the west section was forwarded for additional study and refinement (West-6).


Summary of CAC Recommendation and PDT Decision for west alternatives.
 Two way left turn Mini couplet Combo Combo w/ Dawn Drive connector
CAC RecommendationDropDropForwardForward
PDT DecisionDropDropForwardDrop
These concepts contain elements of the design component evaluatedWest-2West-4West-1
West-5
West-6
West CAC 2
West PDT 1
West PDT-2
West-3
West-7
West CAC 1

Note: Red indicates final decision to Drop.
        Green indicates final decision to Forward.  

For additional information on why teams chose to forward or drop alternatives and design concepts, see the full west section dismissal matrix for the west section.  

East Section Alternatives

August 2005
Between May and August 2005, the Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and Project Development Team (PDT) worked with ODOT technical staff to develop 11 concepts for the east section of the project area. At the August CAC and PDT meetings, committee members reviewed the various components that comprise the 11 east concepts. Certain components were recommended for forwarding or dropping by the CAC on August 11, 2005. These recommendations were then voted on by the PDT on August 12, 2005. Results of the recommendation and voting on the design elements were:


Aug 2005 Summary of CAC Recommendation and PDT Decision for east design elements
 West Park ConnectorAdditional Lanes on Hwy 199Fourth BridgeUnion Slip Ramp
CAC RecommendationDropForwardDropForward
PDT DecisionDrop*ForwardDropDrop
These concepts contain elements of the design component evaluatedEast 2
East 3
East 4
East CAC 1A
East 4
East PDT 1
East CAC 1A
East CAC 1B
East 6East PDT 1
East PDT 2
East CAC 1
East CAC 2

* PDT voted to forward this component only if a 20% or more reduction in traffic occurs when upgrading the West Park road classification. Further traffic analysis found that traffic is reduced by 13% with the reclassification of West Park. Thus, the West Park Connector was dropped from further study.
Note: Red indicates final decision to Drop.
        Green indicates final decision to Forward.

Frontage roads and driveway collectors weren’t voted on and were continued to be considered for additional consideration.

The 11 concepts were repackaged into 5, keeping design components that PDT voted to keep, dropping what the PDT voted to drop, and mixing and matching “surviving” components into new concepts

Based on the rearranging and refined traffic modeling information, the following concepts contained the following characteristics:
 AugustOctober
East 1Full frontage roadFull frontage road
Redwood Ave slip ramp
Additional lanes
East 2Partial frontage road
Partial W. Park Connector
Tussey cul-de-sac
Partial frontage road
Redwood Ave slip ramp
Additional lanes
Tussey cul-de-sac
East 3*Partial W. Park connector
Driveway collector
Driveway collector
East 4*Additional lanes
Partial W. Park connector
Driveway collectors
Tussey cul-de-sac
Additional lanes
Tussey cul-de-sac
Driveway collectors
East 5Full frontage road with small bridgesFull frontage roadwith small bridges
Additional lanes
East 6*Fourth Bridge
Redwood Ave slip ramp
Redwood Ave slip ramp
East CAC 1A*Full W. Park connector
Driveway collector
Union slip ramp
Additional lanes
Tussey cul-de-sac
Driveway collectors
Additional lanes
Tussey cul-de-sac
East CAC 1B*Additional lanes
Redwood Ave slip ramp
Union slip ramp
Additional lanes
Redwood Ave slip ramp
East CAC 2Driveway collectors
Union slip ramp
Skewed intersection at Redwood Ave/Allen Creek
Driveway collectors
Additional lanes
Skewed intersection at Redwood Ave/Allen Creek
East PDT 1*Partial frontage road
Union slip ramp
Additional lanes
Partial frontage road
Additional lanes
East PDT 2Partial frontage road
Union slip ramp
Large bridge connecting Union Ave to Redwood Ave
Partial frontage road
Additional lanes
Large bridge connecting Union Ave to Redwood Ave

* after removing the dropped elements from these concepts, the remaining elements were not unique and were incorporated into other concepts

October 2005

Between August and October 2005, ODOT technical staff used the results of the August CAC and PDT meetings to remove the dropped components from the 11 east concepts. The result was reconfiguring 5 east concepts with the forwarded August components and dropping 6 east concepts (East 3, East 4, East 6, East CAC1A, East CAC1B, and East PDT1). The 6 dropped concepts had no forwarded components or had no unique components that were not already captured in the 5 reconfigured concepts. The 5 concepts presented to the CAC and PDT committees at the October CAC and PDT meetings were: East 1, East 2, East 5, East CAC 2 and East PDT 2. On October 13, 2005, the results were:

Oct 2005 Summary of CAC Recommendation and PDT Decision for east alternatives
 East 1East 2East 5East CAC 2East PDT 2
CAC RecommendationForwardDropForwardForwardDrop
PDT DecisionForwardDropForwardDropDrop

Note: At the November meetings both the CAC and the PDT unanimously recommended that the frontage road structure over Ringuette (East 5A) be eliminated and that it be replaced with a "bulb -out" similar to the East 1 alternative (now shown as East 5B).

Due to the concern about the difference in recommendation by the CAC of East CAC2 and the PDT's decision to drop the alternative, and explanation document was created based on the PDT's concerns and reasons for dropping East CAC2.

November 2005
Three east concepts were reviewed by the CAC and PDT in November 2005: East 1, East 5A (previously the same as East 5), and East 5B. East 5B was created in response to the PDT's request to apply the East 1 treatment at Ringuette Street to East 5. Hence, East 5B was created by melding components of East 1 with East 5. No formal recommendation and decision votes were cast regarding the 3 alternatives. Instead general consensus by both committees was:

Nov 2005 Summary of CAC Recommendation and PDT Decision for east alternatives
 East 1East 5AEast 5B
CAC RecommendationForwardDropForward
PDT DecisionForwardDropForward


June 2006
Between April and June, 2006, the committees revisited two design components (Union Avenue slip ramp and West Park connector) that had been previously studied and not advanced for further study. This revisit was partly in response to public scrutiny of the project during spring 2006. In addition, ODOT presented a preliminary new concept for consideration in response to community requests to minimize impacts on the fairgrounds. This concept was named Concept C. ODOT asked both committees if further study should occur. In June the CAC made recommendations and the PDT made decisions on whether to forward these components and concept for further study. Results were:

June 2006 Summary of CAC Recommendation and PDT Decision for east alternatives
 Union Slip RampWest Park ConnectorConcept C
CAC RecommendationForwardForwardForward
PDT DecisionDropDropForward

July 2006
CAC and PDT members were presented Alternative C (designed to the same level as East 1 and East 5B), which was based Concept C proposed in June 2006. East 1 was renamed as Alternative A; East 5B was renamed as Alternative B. All alternatives (A, B and C) were revised to show construction occurring in two phases. Phase 1 would include all improvements to Hwy 199 as previously assumed as well as an access road extending from Allen Creek Road to the fairgrounds (Alternatives A and C) or a frontage road from Allen Creek Road to Ringuette Street (Alternative B). Phase 2 includes the extension of the access road to Tussey Lane (Alternatives A and C) or the frontage road from Ringuette Street to Tussey Lane (Alternative B). CAC recommendations and PDT decisions were:

July 2006 Summary of CAC Recommendation and PDT Decision for east alternatives
 Alternative AAlternative BAlternative C
CAC RecommendationForwardDropForward
PDT DecisionForwardDropForward


For voting tallies and additional information on why teams chose to forward or drop alternatives and design concepts, see the full east section dismissal matrix for the east section.