DRAFT

EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT STUDY

Prepared for CITYOF ASTORIA,CLATSOP COUNTY AND OREGONDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Prepared by DAVIDEVANS AND ASSOCIATES,INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ...... 3 BYPASS ALTERNATIVES ...... 4 ASTORIA BYPASS ...... 4 EXTENDED BYPASS ...... 4 EXISTING HIGHWAY CONDITIONS ...... 4 ASTORIA EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ...... 5 LAND USE ...... 6 EXISTING LAND USES ...... 6 LAND USE ZONING ...... 9 LAND USE AND PERMITTING CONSTRAINTS ...... 11 NATURAL RESOURCES ...... 14 WETLANDS ...... 14 FLOODPLAIN ...... 20 WILDLIFE ...... 20 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ...... 21 BRIDGE OPTIONS ...... 22 GENERAL BACKGROUND ...... 22 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES ...... 22 ADDITIONAL COSTS ...... 23 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ...... 23 ACCESS MANAGEMENT ...... 25 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ...... 27 1995 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ...... 27 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ...... 27 EXISTING (1 996) INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ...... 28 FUTURE TRAFFIC FORECASTS ...... 31 AUTO TRAVEL DEMAND FORECAST ...... 31 STUDY AREA ...... 31 EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE ...... 32 TRIP GENERATION ...... 34 TRIP DISTRIBUTION ...... 35 TRIP ASSIGNMENT ...... 35 MODEL CALIBRATION ...... 35 2006 AND 20 16 FORECASTS ...... 36 FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AT SPECIFIC INTERSECTIONS ...... 36 FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ALONG SPECIFIC STREETS ...... 39

DRAFT 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

AREA OF SPECIAL INTEREST ...... 41 TRUCK TRAFFIC FORECAST ...... 43 RESULTS OF TRUCK TRAFFIC FORECAST ...... 43 CONCLUSIONS ...... 45

DRAFT I I Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Much concern has been expressed about increased traffic expected to travel by the Astoria High School and required highway widening with the Astoria Bypass route on Highway 202 to Highway 101. Future increases of traffic on the Highway 101 bridge across Youngs Bay (New Youngs Bay Bridge) has also been mentioned as a concern a number of times. Operations at the Smith Point intersection of Highway 101 at Highway 202 and the Miles Crossing intersection of Highway 101 Business Route at Lewis and Clark Road are concerns today as well as for the future. Safety for traffic making turning movements off of Highway 101 Business Route at several locations is an issue. Maintaining the two narrow moveable span bridges is another issue that needs to be resolved for the future. These narrow bridges impede bicycle and pedestrian traffic as well as large vehicular traffic. Planning level analysis has been performed to help determine preferred options for an Extended Bypass Alignment that would alleviate these transportation concerns. This analysis included looking at land use, natural resources, traffic conditions, and estimated costs for the improvements.

In addition to the analysis, questionnaires, a newsletter, and a public meeting were used to solicit public input. A Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) with local agency, ODOT, and public representatives helped review and give direction for the study. Based on all of the analysis and the public input received, the TAC recommended that the existing alignment alternative across Youngs Bay (Old Youngs Bay Bridge) be the preferred alternative. This is shown as alignment A on Figure 1. A new connection west from Highway 101 Business Route with an interchange at Highway 101 is also necessary to attract bypass automobile and truck traffic off of Highway 202 and Highway 101 across the New Youngs Bay Bridge. All of the improvements recommended would include appropriate facilities for bicycles and pedestrians. In addition to the new connection at the west end of the Extended Bypass, other improvements needed are as follows:

1. Two new fixed span bridges (Old Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark). 2. Reconstruction of the existing Highway 10 1, including a left-turn lane through the Jeffers Garden area and at the Fort Clatsoplairport intersection. 3. A realignment to the west of the Miles Crossing intersection.

The proposed Extended Bypass would alleviate several future major transportation concerns, but the estimated cost of approximately $47,000,000 and the wetlands impacts would be difficult to deal with. Most of the cost is for bridges (approximately $38,000,000) which will need to be replaced regardless of whether or not the Extended Bypass is constructed. Much of the new alignment sections of the Extended Bypass west of Miles Crossing and to connect the Extended Bypass to Highway 101 is through wetland areas.

DRAFT 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 1 ASTORIA EXTENDED BYPASS SUMMARY

Section Length Cost 2016 PM 2016 Trucks Natural Resources (miles) Peak ADT and Land Use AltlIAlt 2 Alt 1IAlt 2 Alignment B 1.4 $27,000,000 70011,100 60011,100 Most wetland, pasture (Daggett Point) land, and estuary Alignment A 0.8 $19,500,000 70011,100 50011,020 Estuary and fill with (Old Youngs Bay) some wetland area Wireless Road to 4.5 $23,700,000 4 1018 10 3601704 Pasture land, forested, New Alignment partially developed, and wetlands New Alignment to 1.6 $3,500,000 1530 1410 Most wetlands and US 101 forested

DRAFT 2 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

This document details two alternative alignments for an extended highway bypass around Astoria, Oregon. Currently, traffic traveling between Highways 30 and 101 will frequently use Highway 30 through the center of Astoria as an east-west conduit. Current projections indicate that over the next 20 years, traffic will increase on these roadways to a point where some roadway sections will be operating over capacity. Some areas of particular concern, based on capacity, are the Smith Point intersection (Highway 101 at 202) and Highway 30 east of the existing one-way couplet. A roadway reaches capacity when the volume of traffic exceeds the amount a roadway can handle. Analysis of the problem by the City of Astoria and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has shown that the construction of a new bypass that reroutes traffic to the south of Astoria will greatly reduce traffic growth and congestion within the city particularly on Highway 30.

The original alignment of a bypass for Astoria routes traffic between Highway 30 and 101 over a portion of the Highway 20211 0 1-Business Route and Highway 10 1 from the Astoria Megler Bridge. Projections showed that while this alignment would reroute traffic from the center of Astoria, it would also dramatically increase the amount of traffic passing by Astoria High School along West Marine Drive. Concerns about this increase in traffic led to discussions and this analysis of an alternative extended bypass alignment which would avoid routing additional traffic past the Astoria High School.

Without the alternative extended bypass alignment, the congestion at Smith Point (Highway 101 at Highway 202) would also be considerably higher. The extended bypass alternative also attracts traffic from the New Youngs Bay Bridge and the Harbor Street area of Warrenton on Highway 101. The result is a better balance of traffic between the alternative extended bypass alignment and the original bypass route on Highway 202 to Smith Point.

This document provides information regarding the two proposed extended bypass alignments, such as land use impacts, environmental issues, bridge impacts, access management issues, existing and future traffic projections, and preliminary cost estimates.

DRAFT 3 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 BYPASS ALTERNATIVES

ASTOFUA BYPASS

The Astoria Bypass (John River Bridge-Youngs Bay Bridge) would include a new highway extension linking Highway 30 just west of the John Day River Bridge with Highway 202 near Williamsport Road. The bypass would generally consist of a two-lane travel facility, including climbing lanes with limited access and a design speed of 55 mph from the John Day River Bridge to Highway 202. The portion of the Astoria Bypass on Highway 202 would have lower speeds and additional lanes for left turns and for travel as required for capacity and safety.

EXTENDED BYPASS

A variation of the Astoria Bypass, known as the Extended Bypass, would proceed along the initial bypass alignment, between Highway 30 and Williamsport Road, turning south along Highway 101-Business Route towards the Jeffers Garden area. From there it would continue west across the Lewis and Clark Bridge. A new roadway extension is planned south of the Astoria Airport beginning where the existing highway alignment turns from north to east. A new roadway extension would connect the Highway 101-Business Route and Highway 261101 directly with an east-west link and interchange at the west end of the Extended Bypass alignment. The proposed Extended Bypass alignments are shown on Figure 1. Other improvements associated with the Extended Bypass include replacing the Old Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark Bridges. Street improvements would be made to the Miles Crossing intersection which may include realignment of the highway to the west separated from Miles Crossing. Street improvements would also be made to the existing roadway from the Miles Crossing area to the Lewis and Clark Bridge. These improvements would include sidewalks, bicycle lanes, a turning lane, and access management. Operating speeds along the Extended Bypass alignment would be expected to increase from 35 to 55 mph over the Old Youngs Bay Bridge, 45 mph through Jeffers Gardens, and 55 mph west of the Lewis and Clark Bridge, after all street improvement projects are finished for the Extended Bypass.

Currently, there are two options to the Extended Bypass alignment. Both proposed alignments are similar except in one area, which is at the point of crossing the Youngs Bay. One Extended Bypass alternative crosses Youngs Bay southeast of the Old Youngs Bay Bridge at Daggett Point, requiring the construction of a new bridge. The other alignment crosses Youngs Bay at the approximate location of the existing Old Youngs Bay Bridge. Another variation of the alignment considered was to retain the existing alignment at the westerly end at Highway 101. This existing alignment did not provide the travel time and traffic attraction benefits of the proposed new east-west connection to Highway 101 with an interchange.

EXISTING HIGHWAY CONDITIONS

The existing Highway 101 Business Route from Highway 101126 to Highway 202 for the most part has two. 12- foot-wide travel lanes with one lane in each direction. The exceptions to this are a left-turn refuge for eastbound traffic for the north entrance to the Astoria Airport at MP 1.61 and an added climbing lane for eastbound traffic from MP 2.39 to 2.75. There are also narrower lanes on the Lewis and Clark and Old Youngs Bay Bridges. There are sidewalks on the approaches over the Bay to the Old Youngs Bay Bridge but not on the bridge. There are no shoulders or sidewalks for bicycles or pedestrians to use on the approaches to and across the Lewis and

DRAFT 4 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Clark Bridge. Most of the highway, except for the bridge areas, has paved shoulders adequate for bicycle traffic (six- to eight-foot-wide). The section west from the Lewis and Clark Bridge approach (MP 4.65) has approximately only one foot of paved shoulder plus approximately five-foot gravel shoulders on both sides to mile point 3.5 1.

For the most part, the existing right-of-way is wide along the existing Highway 101 Business route that would be part of the Extended Bypass alignment. The narrowest part of the existing right-of-way is through the Jeffers Gardens area where the right-of-way is 80 feet wide from west of Miles Crossing to the Lewis and Clark Bridge. The rest of the existing Highway 101 Business Route right-of-way is 100 feet or more in width. It appears that at one time there was some right-of-way purchased to realign the highway west of Miles Crossing. Some additional investigation would be required to see if any of this right-of-way would either be available or usable for realigning Highway 10 1 Business Route west of Miles Crossing.

For the existing Highway 101 Business Route, the 1995 average daily traffic volume was approximately 3,500 vehicles per day. There was a total of four reported accidents in 1995 with an accident rate below 0.30 accidents per million vehicle miles. The rural statewide average accident rate for state secondary highways was 1.1 1 accidents per million vehicle miles and the urban statewide rate was 3.27 accidents per million vehicle miles. The 1995 State Highway System Accident Rate Tables published by ODOT showed that the accident rates for the existing route were substantially below the comparable statewide averages in 1995, 1994, and 1993.

ASTORIA EXTENDED BYPASS ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT

In conjunction with the development of the Astoria Transportation Systems Plan (TSP), alternatives for the Extended Astoria Bypass alignment were assessed. Public and agency involvement for the Extended Bypass Alignment Alternatives study were integrated into that provided for the TSP. A key to this involvement was the active participation of a 14 member Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) composed of city, county, and state representatives and local citizens. Specific elements of the public and agency involvement included:

* Extended Bypass alternatives were developed and evaluated by the TAC. An October 1996 newsletter provided an overview of the Extended Bypass alternatives and solicited input on the preferred alternative and issues associated with each alternative through a questionnaire. A paid advertisement in The Daily Astorian duplicated the newsletter questionnaire. An October 29, 1996, open house disseminated information on the alternatives for an extended bypass and solicited input on preferred bypass extensions. Maps of the alternatives were displayed and project staff were available to answer questions as well as receive input. The open house was advertised through the October newsletter, press released, public service announcements, and paid advertisement in The Daily Astorian. Information on the bypass alternatives has also been distributed and input solicited through briefings with local government officials and interest groups such as the Clatsop County Economic Development Committee.

Results

From the comments received it was clear that the majority of the public and agency officials who participated, preferred alternative A which is the existing alignment across Youngs Bay at the Old Youngs Bay Bridge

DRAFT 5 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 location. Public opinion input received through the open house and questionnaires is included in Appendix C of the Astoria TSP report.

LAND USE

Astoria Bypass Land Use and Permitting Summary

The following summarizes the land uses along the proposed Extended Astoria Bypass Alignments, constraints to development posed by the land uses, and permitting procedures that would be required to implement the bypass given the zoning and land uses present.

EXISTING LAND USES

In order to determine the land uses around the proposed Extended Astoria Bypass Alignment Alternatives, a windshield survey was conducted on November 18, 1996. The information gathered from the site visit was combined with information on zoning, lot configuration from the tax assessors maps, and estimated right-of-way width to determine what the land uses were adjacent to the future bypass, as well as which properties would be impacted by the alignment.

The proposed Extended Astoria Bypass passes through a relatively unpopulated area south of Old Youngs Bay Bridge, south to Miles Crossing, west through Jeffers Garden and across the Lewis and Clark River, south and west along Highway 101-Business Route, and then west through an undeveloped area to intersect with Highway 26. The route passes through agricultural, residential, commercial, industrial, and natural areas. To be consistent with the environmental constraints analysis, the land uses along the Extended Astoria Bypass Alignment Alternatives were broken into the seven segments-- Sections A through G, used in that analysis. These sections are shown in Figure 1. Two more segments, Sections H and I, were added for the bridge crossings on the Astoria side of the river.

The Clatsop County Planning Department reviewed their inventory of significant cultural and historic sites and found no such sites present along either of the bypass alignment alternatives.

Section A: Daggett Point

This section refers to the northern portion of Daggett Point. This area is zoned AN (Aquatic Natural) and EFU (Exclusive Farm Use) by the county. There is no development within this section, except for wooden structures of a Bonneville Power Transmission Line. The area is used as a natural area and for pasture land by the neighboring ranches.

Acquisition of the land may affect some grazing uses by the neighboring ranchers. The natural area is also part of the Columbia River Estuary.

Section B: From the Southern Edge of Daggett Point, Along Wireless Road to the Intersection with Highway 101-Business Route

DRAFT 6 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 This section of the alignment includes the southern point of Daggett Point and the portion of Wireless Road that runs east-west. It is primarily zoned EFU with some area zoned AN and a small section zoned MI (Marine Industrial).

Alignment B follows the east-west portion of Wireless Road starting from the bend in the road that heads south, continues west across Cookes Slough, and intersects with Highway 101-Business Route. Wireless Road is paved in asphalt and is approximately 18 to 20 feet wide. According to the Clatsop County Tax Assessors maps, the right-of-way for this road is 60 feet.

Land uses along the roadway from east to west include: pasture land; K Manufacturing an industrial use with scrap vehicles in its yard and an accessory building that is within 10 feet of the roadway; the slough; more pasture land; two old, dilapidated barns (one is within 15 feet of the pavement); a large older home setback roughly 20 feet from the pavement; a smaller house set back roughly 15 feet; pasture land; and a small (roughly 800-square- foot) house setback less than 10 feet from the roadway.

The centerline of the Wireless Road right-of-way is not clear. However, if center of the pavement is close to the centerline, many structures are within or very close to being within the right-of-way. Widening the roadway for the Astoria Bypass would probably require the demolition of two or three of the houses, one or two the barns, and the "K Manufacturing" accessory building.

"K Manufacturing" is used for metalworking. Therefore, there may be a potential for contamination of the site.

Section C: Highway 101-Business Route, Nortlz of Wireless Road Intersection to Old Youngs Bay Bridge

This section of the alignment is fairly developed with commercial and residential uses. The zoning is GC (general commercial) on both sides of the highway. Land uses running south from the Old Youngs Bay Bridge include: abandoned old trucks, a small retail store, a motorcycle parts and hardware store, around 21 houses with a group of 12 houses set up like duplexes with attached carports--on the east side of the highway; and small retail outfits (a carpet outlet), a tire store with an outdoor storage area, and three houses (one within 15 feet of the roadway), on the west side.

Expansion of the roadway may result in the need to demolish an existing house that is on the west side of Highway 101 Business Route within roughly 15 feet of the pavement. Estimated pavement width is 48 feet, estimated right-of-way width is 60 feet.

Section D: Highway 101-Business Route, Soutlz of Wireless Road Intersection to East side of the Lewis and Clark Bridge

This section of the highway runs south to Miles Crossing and then heads east to the Lewis and Clark Bridge. Zoning along the north-south section includes: RA1 (Residential Agriculture), EFU (Exclusive Farm Use), LI (Light Industrial), and GC (General Commercial).

Land uses along this section of the road include: four houses; a barn; a building with construction materials out front (plywood); around ten older construction vehicles, trucks, and cars; pasture land; an auto repair shop; and a power equipment retail store.

DRAFT 7 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 The east-west section of Highway 101 Business Route starts at Miles Crossing. The zoning is primarily GC with pockets of EFU and AN on the north side of the highway, and a patch of RA1 on the south side near the bridge. The land uses include farms, residential, light industrial, and retail. The Miles Crossing intersection has a BP gas station and convenience store to the south, and Columbia Pacific Housewarmers providing oil and other heat supplies to the north. West of the BP on the south side, is a Rider truck rental, a house, a large industrial building with construction vehicles outside, a body shop, more houses, Ogilvie Manufacturing with construction vehicles out front, a sawshop, an office, some commercial buildings, a muffler shop, a wreckyard, and more houses. Heading west on the north side of the road there are four houses, an agricultural field, Johnson Oil with gas pumps outside, more housing, a body and paint shop, an industrial use, housing, the fire station, more housing, some large garages, and an auto wreckyard.

Highway 101-Business Route is fairly wide through this portion of the route and none of the uses are very close to the pavement. Therefore, it is unlikely that any necessary upgrading of the route would require the demolition of current uses in this section. The estimated pavement width through this section is 48 feet, and the estimated right- of-way width is 60 feet.

Many of the sites along this section may have contaminated soils. Based on the uses, likely sites include: Ogilvie Manufacturing which sandblasts buoys, the gas station, the oil providers, the auto body shops, and the auto wreckyards.

Section E: Highway 101-Business Route, West of Lewis and Clark Bridge, Nortlz/Soutlz Stretclz and Area East of Fort Clatsop Loop Road

This section of the alignment is mostly unimproved. Development is limited to a truck part and repair shop north of Highway 101 Business Route near Airport Road, with trucks and cars stored in back that appear to be immobile. Section E is zoned AC-2 (Aquatic Conservation), just north of the bridge, south of the bridge, and east of the highway along the river. The area west of the north south stretch of the highway is zoned RD (Rural Development); I1 (General Industrial); and RA1 (Residential Agriculture). The area on the south side of the highway near Fort Clatsop Road is zoned RA1.

Section F: Highway 101 Business Route, East/West Stretclz, West of Fort Clatsop Loop Road

Zoning along this section of the highway is RA1; F38, Primary Forest; and 11. There was no development evident along Section F. The land uses included wooded areas and pasture lands both north and south of the highway.

Section G: UndevelopedStretclz Connecting Higlz way 101 Business Route and Higlz way 101/26

The stretch connecting Highway 101 Business Route and Highway 26/101 is undeveloped containing uplands, wetlands, and a waterway which winds through the proposed route. Zoning is I1 and RD.

DRAFT 8 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Section H: Area Just North of Old Youngs Bay Bridge

This area is within the City of Astoria is zoned A-1 (Aquatic Development), A-3 (Aquatic Conservation), A-4 (Aquatic Natural), R-3 (High Density Res.), C-3 (General commercial),and IN (institutional).

Land uses include an optometrists office in the C-3 area, an electrical substation in the IN zone, a Yacht club in the A-1 zone, apartments in the R-3 zone, and a shipyard in S-2 (general development shorelands).

Section I: Area North of Alternative B Bridge Alignment oust north of where the bridge would connect with the Astoria side)

This area off of Highway 202 is highly developed. The section of land that juts out into the bay contains a convenience store with eating area and pool tables, gas pumps, a dock with boats and launch area, and fishing equipment storage outside and within two small buildings. The site is zoned S-2.

LAND USE ZONING

The proposed Extended Astoria Bypass passes through a relatively unpopulated area, south of Old Youngs Bay Bridge and then travels west from Miles Crossing to Highway 261101. The proposed route passes through two generally distinctive land use areas: south of Old Youngs Bay Bridge to the Lewis and Clark River is primarily agricultural land and a mostly forested area from Airport Road west to Highway 261101. The proposed route passes through two land use jurisdictional areas: Clatsop County and the City of Warrenton.

Table 2 summarizes the existing land use zones for Alignment A (over Old Youngs Bay Bridge to Highway 261101). Alternative B follows the same alignment from where Wireless Road meets Highway 101 Business Route to Highway 261101. Road improvements are allowed under all of these land uses.

DRAFT 9 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 2 EXISTING LAND USE ZONES FOR ALIGNMENT A Location Land Use North end of Old Youngs Bay A-1 (Aquatic Development), A-3 (Aquatic Conservation), A-4 (Aquatic Bridge within Astoria Natural), R-3 (High Density Res.), C-3 (General commercial), IN (institutional) South end of Old Youngs Bay General commercial (GC) abutting both sides of roadway. Aquatic Natural Bridge to Boonesborough (A4) along east and west shore areas from the roadway. Boonesborough to Miles Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Residential Agriculture (RA 1) contiguous to Crossing roadway. Light Industrial (LI) and General Commercial at juncture of Miles Crossing. Miles Crossing to Carnegie General Commercial abutting the roadway. Exclusive Farm Use and Street Residential Agriculture on north side of roadway. Single Family Residence (SF1) on southeast comer. Residential Agriculture and Exclusive Farm Use on south side. Camegie Street to Lewis and Residential Agriculture on north and south side of roadway. Clark River Lewis and Clark River to Airport Aquatic Conservation (A2) along river shoreline. Residential Agriculture Road (Fort Clatsop intersection) along south side of roadway, bordering Agriculture Forest (AF 20) area. Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) on northwest side of roadway, adjacent to Port of Astoria Airport. Airport Road to Adams Slough Small area of Residential Agriculture on northeast and southeast comer. Primarily Forest (F38) land on both sides of roadway. Adams Slough to Highway Within Warrenton City UGB. Designated as General Industrial (11). Most of 2611 0 1 (Proposed new road the land area is wetlands and is currently being considered for protection alignment area) status.

Table 3 shows land use zoning for Alignment B bypass route which crosses the Youngs Bay from Highway 202, passes through Daggett Point to Wireless Road, before connecting to the Highway 101-Business Route.

TABLE 3 LAND USE ZONING FOR ALIGNMENT B Location Land Use North end of Alternative B Bridge Alignment (off S-2 (General Development Shorelands) Hwy 202 between Sherman and Hancock) Daggett Point Aquatic Natural (A4) Daggett Point to Wireless Road Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). A small section in the southwest corner of the point abutting Wireless Road is designated Marine Industrial (MI).

According to Ron Larsen, Director of Airport Operations, there are no plans to expand or change any of the land uses at the Port of Astoria Airport in the near or long-term future.

The most westerly portion of the proposed new alignment is located within the Urban Growth Boundary (UBG) of the City of Warrenton. The land area is currently zoned as General Industrial (11). Most of the land is classified as wetlands and is presently under consideration for protection status. The City of Warrenton is currently in the

DRAFT 10 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 process of amending its land use map and anticipates changing the land use designation from General Industrial to Wetlands Protection.

LAND USE AND PERMITTING CONSTRAINTS

Construction of either of the bypass alternatives is complicated by the environmental sensitivity of the area, possible contaminated sites, and the location of houses and other structures in or near the right-of-way. As mentioned above, several structures may have to be demolished to make room for the bypass. If Alternative A were implemented, a house in Section C would probably have to be demolished, also some of the existing development on the north side of Old Youngs Bay Bridge in Section H may be disturbed by construction. If Alternative B were implemented, two or three houses, one or two barns, and an accessory building in Section B would probably have to be demolished or moved depending upon the exact location. Also, the convenience store, dock, and accessory structures in Section I at the north side of the Alternative B bridge alignment may be impacted.

In addition, a number of potentially contaminated developments along the alignments may be impacted by roadway widening. The majority of likely contaminated sites are in Section D, where development is setback a fair distance from the alignment. However, some of these may still be impacted by widening the Highway 101- Business Route alignment. One likely contaminated site is K Manufacturing in Section B. This business and an accessory building are quite close to Wireless Road and would be impacted by roadway widening.

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) may require permitting for any excavation or dredging of possibly contaminated sites. Furthermore, the existence of wetlands along both alignments requires permitting with the Division of State Lands and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Local Permitting

Clatsop County

Clatsop County has jurisdiction over the majority of the study area. According to the Clatsop County Planning Department, several land use actions would be necessary to implement the bypass alignments. These include an exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3- Agricultural Lands, minor land partitions, property line adjustments, possible variances to lot size/configuration standards, and a Type I1 "Review Use."

An exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3- Agricultural Lands for the EFU lands will be required if Alternative B is chosen. Alignment B, passes through an EFU zone on Daggett Point where there is currently no roadway. The creation of new land parcels in EFU zones for the purpose of creating public roads and highway projects would not be an outright permitted or conditional use under EFU zoning the necessitating an exception. In order to acquire the needed right-of-way through the area, new parcels would have to be created. The goal exception would be processed under a Type IV procedure with public hearings before the Clatsop County Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners.

While both Alignment A and B pass through an F38 (Forest) zone, no exception to Statewide Planning Goal 4-

April 1997 way through the zone, widening the route beyond the current right-of-way can be accomplished by adjusting property lines.

If the exception to Goal 3 were granted, implementation of Alignment B would also require permits for partitioning the land to create the new right-of-way. In addition, if the newly partitioned lots could not meet the development standards of the EFU zone (lot size or configuration), then a permit for a variance would also be required.

A Type I1 approval of a "Review Use" would be required for replacing the Old Youngs Bay Bridge (Alignment A), creating a new bridge (Alignment B), widening or replacing the Lewis and Clark Bridge (both alignments), and any development within the Aquatic zones or the Shoreland Overlay District. A Type I1 process involves public notification of the proposal with posted notice, and mailed notice to property owners with property within 250 of the site, and published notice in a newspaper. The ""Review Use" application is sent to the Columbia River Estuary Study Taskforce (CREST). CREST reviews all applications for development within the estuary and makes a recommendation to the County based on its review of the proposal and applicable ordinance standards. A decision is then made by the Planning Director after affected agencies and surrounding property owner are given an opportunity to comment.

As part of the "Review Use" application, the applicant must submit an Impact Assessment and a Resource Capability Determination for the development. The Impact Assessment must provide a comprehensive account of how the proposal will affect estuarine biology, hydrology, water and air quality, navigation, public access, public interest, and future uses. The Resource Capability Determination examines the effects on fish and wildlife habitat, biological productivity, values for scientific research and education, renewable resources, recreation and aesthetic values, and aquaculture. These documents need to provide evidence that the development would not degrade the estuarine resource or that effects are minor and can be readily mitigated.

TIze City of Astoria

The only portions of the alignment that fall under the City of Astoria's jurisdiction are the northern bridge connections. Both bridge alignments would require that a "Review Use" permit be submitted to CREST for review and recommendation. These permits would follow the same procedure as "Review Use" permits in Clatsop County (with the exception that the city would make the final decision) and necessitate an Impact Assessment and Resource Capability Determination. In addition, because implementing the Alignment B bridge would require acquisition of right-of-way, permits for partitioning off the needed land would also be necessary.

The Alignment A bridge would probably not require any additional permitting to the "Review Use." This is because the bridge would use the same right-of-way as the current Old Youngs Bay Bridge. It would not need any additional right-of-way and impact to surrounding on shore uses would be limited.

Warrenton

The only part of the bypass that would fall under the City of Warrenton's jurisdiction is the small area inside the city limits. The Urban Growth Area outside of the city limits is administered by Clatsop County.

According to the Warrenton city planner, the only permits needed for building the roadway through property in the city are fill permits. After receiving COE and DSL approval for construction in the wetlands, ODOT must

DRAFT 12 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 bring the approved permits to the city. The city then issues the fill permit based on the other agency's approval of the work.

Type I minor partitions may also be necessary before the right-of-way can be attained through the part of the alignment where there is currently no roadway.

DRAFT 13 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 NATURAL RESOURCES

This section details the Natural Resources analysis done for the bypass alignment alternatives.

WETLANDS

A wetland reconnaissance of the proposed Astoria Bypass Alignment Alternatives was conducted on August 14, 15, and 16, 1996. This reconnaissance involved a determination of the presence or absence of wetlands along the proposed route. An area is considered a wetland if wetland (hydric) soils, hydrology, and vegetation criteria are all present. To determine if an area is a wetland, the methods described in the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Wetlands Delimation Manual (Environmental Research Laboratory 1987) were used. Wetlands are considered present if wetland vegetation, wetland soils, and wetland hydrology are present.

Wetlands Definition

Wetland plant communities are dominated by hydrophytic plant species. Hydophytic species are adapted to areas where the soil is at least periodically deficient in oxygen due to excessive water content. Vegetation is classified using the indicator status assigned to that species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, Reed, 1988), based on their frequency of occurrence in wetlands. The indicator status of a hydrophytic species is either obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW) or facultative (FAC) based on their relative probabilities of occurring in a wetland. Upland plant species do not tend to occur in wetlands and are assigned the indicator status facultative upland (FACU) or upland (UPL). Species which are not on the USFWS list are assumed to be upland plants. The methodology found in the ACOE Wetlands Delineation Manual was used to determine if a given plant community was dominated by hydrophytic species.

For an area to be a wetland, it must have soils that meet the definition of hydric soils. Hydric soils are soils which are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough (usually a week or more) during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. The county soil series was consulted to determine if hydric soil series were mapped within the proposed extended bypass route by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS, now known as the National Resources Conservation Service, NRCS).

The third criteria that must be met is wetland hydrology. An area is considered to possess wetland hydrology if the soil is saturated to the surface for more than 12.5 percent of the growing season. Areas that are saturated to the surface between five and 12.5 percent of the growing season are sometimes wetlands and sometimes uplands. Areas saturated to the surface for less than five percent of the growing season are not wetlands. The growing season can be approximated as the number of days between the last killing frost in the spring and the first killing frost in the fall, during an average year.

Field indicators of wetland hydrology are divided into two categories: primary and secondary. Primary indicators include visual observation of inundation or saturation within 12 inches of the surface, water marks on woody vegetation or other fixed objects such as fence posts, drift lines, sediment deposits, and drainage patterns. Secondary field indicators include the presence of oxidized rhizospheres (rust coloration around living roots or old root channels) in the upper 12 inches, water-stained vegetation, morphological plant adaptations, and local

DRAFT 14 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 soil survey data. The project area was examined for the presence of primary and secondary indicators of wetland hydrology.

Preliminary Resources Review

A preliminary review of resource materials indicated that there may be wetlands along the proposed route. The Soil Survey of Clatsop County was used to determine if hydric soils are mapped on site. A hydric soils series, the Coquille-Clatsop complex (Series 11A and 12A, depicted on Sheet 10 and Sheet 11) is mapped on more than half of the proposed route. The entire area east of the Lewis and Clark River is mapped as the Coquille-Clatsop complex. Hydric soils are also mapped in the area west of the Lewis and Clark River, through the curves to the straight east-west stretch of the road. Hydric soils are also mapped in a small area just east of Highway 261101.

The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map of the Bypass Alignment depicts several wetlands along the route. Daggett Point is mapped as a palustrine emergentlscrub-shrub wetland. To the west of Daggett Point, several estuarine wetlands are mapped. An open water, subtidal area and an intertidal, emergent estuarine wetland are mapped north of Wireless Road. An emergent estuarine wetland is mapped near the intersection of Wireless Road and Highway 101 Business Route. In the residential area east of the Lewis and Clark River, only one wetland is mapped, a narrow palustrine scrub-shrub wetland. A wide intertidal estuarine flat is mapped along the western edge of the Lewis and Clark River at the Bridge. A palustrine, emergent wetland is mapped just to the west of the estuarine wetland. Several wetlands are mapped along the eastlwest stretch of Highway 101 Business Route, west of the Lewis and Clark River; a palustrine forested wetland and a palustrine scrublshrub wetland. A small palustrine forested wetland is mapped just east of Highway 261101.

Field Results

The bypass route was divided into 7 sections for wetland analysis. The location of each section was determined based on geography and convenience. Section A begins at the most easterly point of the proposed route, at Daggett Point. The most westerly section, Section G, ends where the proposed route and Highway 261101 would intersect.

The wetland locations depicted on Figure 3 are approximate. During field work, wetlands were delineated on a map with a scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet. This scale does not allow resolution of all but the largest structures. It gives only limited information on the changes in plant communities, making precise mapping impossible.

Along much of the proposed route, Highway 101 Business Route is on a berm of fill above wetland areas. The fill area slopes down to the natural elevation, with a ditch located at the base of the fill area in many areas. The location of ditches that meet wetland criteria along the roads is noted because jurisdiction over these ditches may be asserted by the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) or Department of State Lands (DSL) on a case-by-case basis. It is more likely that jurisdiction will be asserted if the ditch was dug in an area that was a wetland prior to road building activities. This includes the areas in which hydric soils are mapped and areas with adjacent wetlands. It is unlikely that wetlands will be asserted for ditches in more urban type developed areas such as the Jeffers Gardens community.

The width of the proposed route that encompasses wetlands varies. This is due in part to the fact that the fill area of the roadbed varies in width. In some areas where the fill has a steep, abrupt slope, the ditches begin within 20

DRAFT 15 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 feet of the centerline of the roadway. In other areas with more gradual slopes, the wetland areas begin at 30 to 40 feet from the centerline. This distance was visually estimated and is noted on the maps.

Section A: Daggett Point

All of Daggett Point is a wetland. It is identified as a palustrine wetland on the NWI map. It appears to be tidally influenced and may be better classified as an estuarine wetland, rather than as a palustrine wetland. Deep ditches, obscured by vegetation, wind through this mixed scrublshrub and emergent wetland. Because Daggett Point is private property and quite difficult to access, only the southern portion was investigated. Wooden structures of a Bonneville Power Transmission Line are located near the area of the proposed route. There may be areas of fill around the wooden structures but they were not visible.

Section B: From tlte Soutlzern Edge of Daggett Point, Along Wireless Road to the Intersection with Highway 101 Business Route

The proposed route enters a pasture south of the dike around Daggett Point. The three wetland criteria were met in this pasture area, as verified by a sample plot. The National Resource Conservation Service may consider this pasture a farmed wetland. The landowner who also farms the site, confirmed that the pasture is regularly plowed and planted. West of the farmed wetland, along the north side of Wireless Road, the proposed route crosses an intertidal estuarine flat (known locally as Cook's Slough).

A pasture is west of Cook's Slough, along the northern side of Wireless Road. A ditch runs between the road and an upland berm to the north. When the ditch was dug along Wireless Road, the contents of the ditch were sidecast to the north, forming the upland berm. A home site is located to the west of the pasture. West of the home, an emergent estuarine wetland is adjacent to the north side of Wireless Road. This wetland begins within 25 feet of the center of Wireless Road, and runs along Wireless Road for approximately 200 feet.

Cook's Slough crosses under Wireless Road and flows to the south. The proposed route may impact the bridge and this portion of Cook's Slough, depending on its exact route. A wetland pasture area is located along the south side of Wireless Road, to the west of Cook's Slough. Approximately 60 feet of the western edge of the pasture area is not wetland. A local farmer related that this pasture has not been plowed for at least 50 years so it may not qualify as a farmed wetland, despite being grazed for a portion of the year. A ditch without an associated wetland is west of the pasture. A ditch and associated wetland are south of the intersection of Wireless Road and Highway 10 1-Business Route.

Section C: Higlzway 101 Business Route, Nortlz of Wireless Road Intersection to Old Youngs Bay Bridge

This narrow residential and business area is built on fill. There are no wetlands on the east side of the road. At the edge of the existing bridge across Young's Bay there are no wetlands. Fill materials, composed of rocks and concrete extend to the water's edge. On the west side of the road, there is one wetland area in an undeveloped parcel that slopes down to the bay. Willow and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) are the dominant species in this estuarine wetland. This wetland area begins within 40 feet of the center of the road. Construction of a bridge replacing Old Youngs Bay Bridge west of the current alignment could impact this wetland.

DRAFT 16 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Section D: Highway 101-Business Route, South of Wireless Road Intersection to East side of the Lewis and Clark Bridge

A long, narrow wetland pasture is south of Wireless Road and east of Highway 101 Business Route. The fill descends steeply to a willow-lined ditch adjacent to the wet pasture. The ditch and adjacent wetland begin within 40 feet of the road centerline. South of this area, a ditch is located along a portion of the road, without an adjacent wetland.

West of the Wireless Road and Highway 101 Business Route intersection, a narrow ditch and adjacent estuarine wetland lie between Young's Bay and the road. The ditch begins about 30 feet west of the centerline. Two wet meadows are to the south, along the west side of Highway 101 Business Route. Ditches are not associated with these wetlands and the wetland boundaries begin about 40 feet from the centerline.

In the Miles Crossing area, the proposed route leaves Highway 101 Business Route and curves through a meadow behind existing businesses. Most of this meadow is an emergent wetland. To the west of this curve homes, businesses and farms are along the east-west stretch of Highway 101 Business Route. Ditches are located along some portions of the north and south side of the road. Most of the ditches are within 50 feet of the centerline of Highway 101 Business Route. The ditches to the east are filled with hydrophytic vegetation and appear to meet wetland criteria. To the west, near the Lewis and Clark Bridge, the vegetation has been removed or cut and no standing water was observed. It is unlikely these ditches would be considered wetland and they were not mapped. As explained earlier these ditches are in the more built up urban area in front yards with non hydric soils and as a result are not likely to have wetland jurisdiction asserted.

The ditches that meet wetland criteria have adjacent wetlands in three places. Two wetland areas are along the south side of the road. A narrow band of shrub/scrub wetland, less than 10 feet wide, is about 50 feet from the centerline. This narrow wetland is depicted on the NWI map. It is the part of a willow-lined creek that is culverted under Highway 101-Business Route. To the east, a wetland is in a vacant lot. It is a reed canarygrass dominated wetland. North of Highway 101-Business Route, a wet pasture is located adjacent to a ditch.

Just east of the Lewis and Clark Bridge, a small wetland is located adjacent to a small home, on the south side of Highway 101-Business Route. The wetland boundary is approximately 40 feet off the road centerline. No wetlands are at the Lewis and Clark Bridge on the south side of the road. On the north side of the road, an estuarine wetland, about 60 feet wide eastlwest, is at the water's edge.

Section E: Highway 101-Business Route, West of Lewis and Clark Bridge, Nortlz/South Stretch and Area East of Fort Clatsop Loop Road

The road throughout most of this section is built on fill. On the western edge of the Lewis and Clark Bridge, a large area of estuarine wetlands lies on both sides of road. The wetland boundaries are within 30 feet of centerline, at the base of the steep fill areas. Upland areas are along the western side of the road at the curve. The willow lined area along the curve does not qualify as a wetland because the understory is not composed of hydrophytic vegetation. A Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) dominated area lies along the road where the curve straightens. This area is also an upland because it does not meet wetland vegetation criteria.

Along the eastern side of the road at the curve, a gravel parking strip is located along the road. Although wetlands are adjacent to the gravel parking strip, the wetland boundary is more than 50 feet from the centerline.

DRAFT 17 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 West of the Lewis and Clark Bridge the alignment of the road changes from east/west to northlsouth between two curves. There are several potential wetland areas in the northlsouth stretch. The road is lined with ditches within 40 feet of the centerline. The ditches vary from 5 to 10 feet wide. West of the road, most of the area beyond these ditches is upland. In the approximate center of this straight stretch of road, west of Highway 101 Business Route, a creek and its associated wetland flows into a culvert underneath the road. South of this creek, another creek parallels the road for a distance, flowing north, then turning east to flow through a culvert under Highway 101-Business Route. The steep banks of this creek are approximately 50 feet from the road centerline. Although no adjacent wetlands were observed, this is a jurisdictional waterway of the United States falling into the "other waters" category.

The east side of this northlsouth straight stretch is wetter than the west side. Scrublshrub wetlands are associated with ditches. The ditch edge is within 35 to 40 feet of the centerline. In some areas the wetland area is narrow, due to the berm formed by a dike along the Lewis and Clark River. Several waterways flow along this road or culverted under the road. Standing water is present in pools along the road edge. As on the eastern side of the road, a creek runs parallel to the road, with the edge of creek about 50 feet from centerline.

The road curves to the west. A narrow forested wetland about 20 feet wide is southeast of the curve. This wetland is a wooded swale that lies within 40 feet of the centerline. A house site is west of this swale. West of the house site, a wetland pasture is on the south side of the road. The wetland boundary is about 40 feet from the centerline. A narrow willow dominated area lies to the west, about 50 feet from the centerline.

Along the northern side of the road at the curve, a ditch is about 40 feet north of centerline. The road to the airport veers off to the north. The triangular area bordered by the roads at the intersection is a wetland. Hydric soils are present, the vegetation criteria is met and it is likely that runoff from roads supplies wetland hydrology.

Section F: Higlzway 101-Business Route, EastWest Stretclz, West of Fort Clatsop Loop Road

A steep forested hill is on both sides of the road at the eastern edge of Section F. Just to the west the land slopes down to a palustrine forested wetland on both sides of the road. The boundary of these wetlands is within 40 feet of the center of the road. North of the road an emergent wetland is located to the east of the NWI mapped wetland.

An upland pasture is west of the NWI mapped wetland. The road is cut through a bank to the west of the pasture. Along the sides of the road, narrow ditches, less than two feet wide lie within 50 feet of center line. Because this was not a wetland area before the road was built, it is highly unlikely these ditches would be jurisdictional wetlands.

There are no wetlands in the western end of the proposed route along Highway 101 Business Route. The road slopes steeply down into a forested area with an understory dominated by elderberry (Sambucus sp.) and sword fern (Polystichum munitum). Some areas with an understory of hydrophytic vegetation, including salmon berry (Rubus spectabilis) and sedge (Carex sp.) are located in this area. Soils in these areas are non-hydric and the hydrophytic vegetation appears to be supported by run-off from the highway, which drains from the area too quickly to allow development of hydric soils.

The NWI map depicts a wetland at the curve, where the proposed route leaves Business 10 1. This wetland is not mapped correctly. It is west of the area depicted on the map.

DRAFT 18 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Section G: Undeveloped Stretch Connecting Highway 101-Business Route and Highway 26/101

This undeveloped stretch was evaluated by using a walking (field) review, driving through and aerial photography. In some areas accessibility was limited by dense vegetation and the aerial photography was used to supplement the field review. The proposed route would veer off Highway 101-Business Route, and head west, eventually intersecting Highway 261101. A waterway winds through this part of the proposed route. This waterway would be considered jurisdictional waters of the United States that would need to be crossed twice. The first crossing would involve about 100 feet of jurisdictional waters and the second crossing would involve a 25 to 50 foot wide strip. Upland fields are located along the waterway.

To the west, the proposed route is mostly forested. Although this area is mapped as an upland on the NWI and no hydric soils are mapped in this are, the forested area is an uplandlwetland mosaic that is approximately 50 percent wetland. An overstory of willow, red alder ('lnus rubra) and sitka spruce (Picea sitchensisj shades a fern and sedge dominated understory. Slightly higher elevation areas within this forested wetland support upland species such as dewberry (Rubus ursinus), sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and salal (Gaultheria shallon). These upland inclusions occur randomly throughout the forested wetland so no attempt was made to map their occurrence.

West of the forested wetland lies a large emergent wetland. Small vernal pools dot this wetland area which is dominated by sedge, rush, cattail and bulrush. The southern tip of this wetland lies along the proposed route, a portion of which is an upland meadow. Because it was difficult to locate the exact location of the route in this area, approximately 50 percent of this meadow area is considered wetland.

To the west, a forested area borders the wet meadow. This very densely vegetated area is once again a wetlandlupland mosaic. This forested wetland is similar to the forested wetland located to the east of the meadow, except that the vegetation is more impenetrable and more areas of upland are located in this area. It was difficult to walk a line in this densely vegetated area. The area of the proposed route was traversed in several locations. An estimated 25 to 50 percent of this forested area is a forested wetland

The forested area slopes down to a low spot along Highway 261101. Within the proposed route, a wetland area is located in a depression. This wetland is depicted on the NWI maps as a palustrine emergent wetland. This wetland area extends approximately 150 feet along the existing Highway 261101 and is approximately 200 feet wide east/west along the proposed route. The waterway that winds through this mixed emergent and shrub-scrub wetland may be a tributary of the Skipanon River. This water way would be considered jurisdictional waters of the United States.

Existing Alignment

The section of existing Highway 101 Business from the section FIG boundary to Highway 101126 was also reviewed and is almost all an upland area. The only exception is the creek crossing north of the section FIG boundary.

The following table summarizes the approximate length of wetlands on one or both sides of the proposed extended bypass alignments by section as previously described.

DRAFT 19 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 4 WETLAND AREA SUMMARY LENGTH ALONG EXTENDED BYPASS

Section A B C D E F G

Wetland 1,300 3,100 0 3,400 4,100 400 4,100 Length (ft)

Regulatory Framework

The ACOE and DSL have regulatory jurisdiction over most wetlands in Oregon. Since some of the wetland areas along the route may be considered farmed wetlands, the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), rather than the ACOE, will have regulatory jurisdiction. This change in the oversight of farmed wetlands is detailed in the January 6, 1994 Interagency Memorandum of Agreement Concerning the Delineation of Wetlands for Purposes of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Subtitle B of the Food Security Act. The NRCS makes the final binding determination of on-site wetlands for the purposes of Section 404 permitting. The NRCS typically considers agricultural land a wetland if hydric soils are mapped on-site, unless the hydrology of the site has been modified. The DSL will make the final determination of on-site wetlands, in both farmed and non-farmed areas, for the purposes of the Oregon Fill and Removal Law.

FLOODPLAIN

The existing road is built up on a dike above the 100-year flood elevation. The elevated road extends until west of the airport. Widening the existing road, or realignment over Dagget Point would require filling into the floodplain.

WILDLIFE

The project is situated within the Oregon Coastal Range physiographic province, as defined in the Oregon Nongame Wildlife Management Plan. Approximately 62 species of mammals, 247 species of birds, 24 herptile species, and 39 fish species regularly use this province.

The coastal and estuary environments in the vicinity of this project are important to a wide variety of wildlife species. Many birds use the area during migration from nesting grounds in the north to wintering grounds in the south. Many species of birds winter in the coastal zone, moving to nesting areas inland in the spring. Wintering waterfowl serve as a prey-base for populations of non-migratory bald eagles along the Columbia River and other nearby rivers and lakes.

There is a great blue heron rookery located in a stand of mature sitka spruce and western hemlock trees east of Williamsport Road. Herons nesting at the rookery may use the Dagget Point wetland complex as foraging grounds.

DRAFT 20 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 An osprey nest was located within a half-a-mile of Highway 261101, west of Fort Clatsop Loop Road. Ospreys are a protected species in the State of Oregon. Construction activities within a one-mile radius may be subject to a seasonal restriction.

Youngs Bay is an important fisheries and wildlife habitat area. Construction of new crossings of Youngs Bay and the Lewis and Clark River will require coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Specific concerns that will need to be addressed include impacts to shallow-water habitat, removal of riparian vegetation, and shading effects.

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES

Bald eagles, salmon species, peregrine falcons, Oregon silverspot butterflies, and snowy plovers have been documented as occurring in the project vicinity (Oregon Natural Heritage Program 1996). However there was no visual evidence of any habitat for these species. A Biological Assessment will need to be conducted on species that may be present in the project area by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. One species that may be present is Coho salmon with additional bridge area shading being the primary additional impact.

DRAFT 2 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 BRIDGE OPTIONS

GENERAL BACKGROUND

Two bridges are included in this study--the Old Youngs Bay Bridge and the Lewis and Clark Bridge--which carry Highway 101-Business Route traffic past the city of Astoria south of the Columbia River. Both existing bridges are low-level bridges with moveable spans over the main channel for waterway traffic. They were constructed during the early 1900s under Conde B. McCullough, Oregon's noted Bridge Engineer. The bridges need extensive maintenance, have narrow roadways without adequate bike and pedestrian facilities, and do not meet current structural or functional design standards. Electrical and mechanical parts are becoming more difficult or impossible to find. Both bridges will either require replacement or major rehabilitation in approximately 25 years.

CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES

This study considers the cost and feasibility of replacing or maintaining the Old Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark bridges as part of a highway project to route traffic around the city of Astoria. Costs are estimated from historic data for similar construction. Two alignments were considered for the Old Youngs Bay Bridge--one adjacent to the existing bridge (alignment A) and the other upstream at Daggett Point (alignment B). Cost estimates were calculated for both a moveable "bascule" span and a high-level fixed span over the main channel at each location.

The following assumptions were made for construction of both replacement bridges: Estimated costs are for bid prices in 1996 dollars. Overall outside structure width of 58 feet. This includes two 12 foot travel lanes with 10 shoulders and 6 foot sidewalks. 130-foot horizontal clearance at the main channel. 80-foot vertical clearance at the main channel. Existing bridges to be removed. Work trestle required for construction access. Maintain traffic on existing bridges during construction.

The assumptions for widths and vertical clearances were based on current standards and discussions with the US Coast Guard, Seattle, Washington office. Proposed replacement structures (58 foot outside width) were assumed to include two 12 foot wide travel lanes, 10-foot shoulders and six-foot sidewalks with side rails. Both the horizontal (130 foot) and vertical (80 foot) channel clearances were based on the discussions with the US Coast Guard and channel users. The assumed clearances would be adequate for any of the currently expected bay shipping and boat traffic. It is possible that a more detailed investigation in the future could result in lesser clearances. This would be dependent on changes in the existing or expected water transportation users. Schematic drawings showing dimensions are on Figures 4, .5, and 6.

DRAFT 22 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 ADDITIONAL COSTS

Additional operation and maintenance costs for the new replacement bridges over the next 25 years have been included in the cost estimates. The estimates include costs for routine operation, maintenance, and inspection. These cost estimates were calculated as the lump-sum present-worth of the estimated yearly operating costs. The estimated costs of repairs and upgrades to the electrical and mechanical moveable span systems as well as replacement of the timber approach spans of the existing bridges have also been included. Major maintenance of the replacement bridges would not be needed for over 50 years.

For this study, the total present-worth dollar value of these additional costs is estimated to be:

Moveable span alternatives $1,200,000 per bridge Fixed span alternatives $20,000 per bridge

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

The bridge approach lengths used have been extended to avoid roadway fills in wetland areas shown on the maps used for planning. These are very approximate and would need study during preliminary design.

The project is located in an area with a probability of strong seismic activity--there is a 10 percent probability that peak rock accelerations at the site will exceed 0.3 times the force of gravity. The structure type selected must be able to accommodate significant deflections. The existing bridges do not meet current seismic design standards.

Maintaining the existing moveable bridges for traffic will require extensive maintenance. Beyond 25 years, the yearly costs to keep the existing moveable bridges functioning will escalate dramatically. The moveable bridges will need complete replacement or major rehabilitation in 25 years.

The approach spans are badly deteriorated and also need to be replaced. The bridges would need to be closed for this work. (one year min for each bridge) Mechanical and electrical systems need rehabilitation and the moveable spans need painting. ODOT's operating personnel report frequent accidents due to the narrow roadway at the moveable spans. The narrow roadway widths and substandard vertical alignment would continue under the alternatives that maintain the existing bridges.

The following estimated costs have been included for this work during the next 20 years: Mechanical and electrical rehabilitation at $1,500,000 per bridge. Old Youngs Bay approach span replacement at $5,000,000. Lewis and Clark approach span replacement at $3,000,000.

Table 5 displays the total estimated costs for each bridge. It should be noted that much of the money spent for maintaining the existing bridges and approach spans for 20 years would be lost when the bridges are replaced. In other words the maintenance alternative only delays the replacement and or major rehabilitation for the two existing moveable bridges.

DRAFT 2 3 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 5 ASTORIA EXTENDED BYPASS BRIDGE REPLACEMENTS SUMMARY OF COSTS

Description Total Bridge Cost* Remarks Upper Youngs Bay-Alterantive A1 $3 1,000,000 Parallel existing alignment Moveable Span Upper Youngs Bay-Alternative A2 $19,500,000 Parallel existing alignment Fixed Span Upper Youngs Bay Alternative B 1 $39,500,000 Daggett Point alignment Moveable Span Upper Youngs Bay-Alternative B2 $27,000,000 Daggett Point alignment Fixed Span Upper Youngs Bay-Alternative A3 $6,500,000 Retain present roadway width. Close Maintain Existing for 20 Years bridge for span replacement.

Lewis and Clark River-Alternative A 1 $23,000,000 Parallel existing alignment Moveable Span Lewis and Clark River-Alternative A2 $19,500,000 Parallel existing alignment Fixed Span Lewis and Clark River-Alternative A3 $3,900,000 Retain present roadway width. Maintain Existing for 20 Years Close bridge for span replacement.

DRAFT 24 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 ACCESS MANAGEMENT

Access management is a process of managing vehicular access to land development while simultaneously preserving the flow of traffic on the surrounding road system. This management is achieved by providing standards for accessing the roadway via driveways or curb cuts. On high capacity arterials or highways, frequent driveways can reduce the capacity and safety of the roadway.

Access management is an important key to balanced urban growth. As evidence, lack of a prudent access management plan has led to miles of strip commercial development along the arterial streets of many urban areas. Business activities along arterial streets lead to increased traffic demands which require roadway improvements to accommodate increasing traffic. Simply managing the access points to the roadway can increase capacity without necessitating high cost solutions like road-widening and new construction.

New roadway improvements and construction, like the Extended Astoria Bypass, can also stimulate further business activity and traffic demands. This often perpetuates a cyclical increase of traffic and new construction to meet the demands of that traffic leading to extensive capital investments for roadway improvements and relocation. However, with Measure 47 and other budget tightening by federal, state, and local governments, the financial resources to pay for such solutions are becoming increasingly scarce.

Reducing capital expenditures is not the only argument for access management. Access management can also preserve the 'functional integrity' of the street system by reserving the high speed and high capacity roads for longer distance trips. These high speed corridors have the least number of direct accesses to local roads and driveways. Local streets, however, will have much less restrictions. This will ensure that local streets are not used by high speed traffic, keeping them safe for multimodal use and businesses on them easy to access.

Access management is best implemented by incorporating it into the land use permitting process. The problem of applying access management to a developed major arterial poses a much greater challenge due to right-of-way limitations and concerns by the owners of the adjacent properties and affected businesses. In such cases, access management can be implemented as part of roadway improvement plans or as part of roadway retrofit plans.

Access Management analysis along the Extended Astoria Bypass has been divided into three sections. Highway 101 in Warrenton to the Lewis and Clark River, the Lewis and Clark River to Wireless Road, and Wireless Road to Highway 202. Table 4 shows the current driveway and roadway spacings along each section along with the 1996 ADT volumes. Figure 1 shows the driveway and roadway spacing graphically.

DRAFT 2 5 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 6 CURRENT ACCESS CONDITIONS AND TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Current Average Highway Highway Segment Section Total Number of Access Access Daily Traffic Length Points (intersecting streets) Points (per Volume (miles) mile) (ADT) From To Westbound Eastbound

This urbanized section of the Astoria Extended Bypass is assumed to be classified as a Category 4 highway described in the 1991 Oregon Highway Plan, which allows driveway and roadway spacing every 500 feet. Table 6 and Figure 1 both show that several areas have spacing at more frequent intervals. Driveway consolidation and a left turn lane would help mitigate any impacts.

The new proposed alignment between Highway 101-Business Route and Highway 261101 would be all new roadway with an interchange at Highway 10 1. This section would be constructed to conform to ODOT Category 3 guidelines from the Oregon Highway Plan. Driveway and roadway spacing would be between a half and one mile apart. Since this is new roadway, initial designs can include the infrastructure necessary to achieve this.

The section of Highway 101 Business from the new alignment to Highway 101 to the east end of the Lewis and Clark Bridge at Jeffers Gardens can be managed to retain a driveway spacing of over 800 feet and a road intersection spacing of over a half mile. This would provide for Category 3 guidelines and an operating speed of 55 mph with the higher expected traffic volumes.

However the Jeffers Garden area between the Lewis and Clark Bridge and Wireless Road has many existing accesses (33.5 per mile) and a lower operating speed would be appropriate. As a result his area will likely be a Category 4 area. Consolidation of driveways will be necessary in order for this section of the Extended Bypass to safely operate at a speed of 45 mph. This may also necessitate the construction of new interior streets and or connections.

The area between Wireless Road and Highway 202 will be all new roadway, mostly consisting of the new bridge. This would also be constructed to conform to Category 3 guidelines. Access consolidation will also be required west of the Old Youngs Bay Bridge. After the bridge, the area from Highway 202 to Highway 30 on the Astoria Bypass will also conform to Category 3 guidelines.

DRAFT 26 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

1995 TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Existing traffic volume information for the Astoria area supplemented with a traffic count program was used to identify 1995 traffic volumes along all designated arterial, collector, and major local streets in the study area. Manual turning movement counts were performed during the peak PM period in June 1995. A total of 22 counts were taken; nine at signalized intersections and 13 at other key intersections in the city. A total of 40 bi- directional road tube counts were taken at separate locations for 24-hour periods.

AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC

The 1995 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on the major streets in Astoria was collected from the following sources: The 1995 Oregon Department of Transportation's Traflc Volume Tables, 24-hour road tube counts, and PM peak hour turning movement counts. The PM peak hour turning movement traffic counts were translated into daily traffic volumes by using a peak hour percentage of 8.5 percent. The peak hour percentage is the ratio of PM peak hour traffic to total daily traffic. This percentage was determined from various 24-hour road tube counts taken in the city. Figure 2 displays the 1995 daily traffic volumes. These conditions are for an average weekday in June, which is one of the peak summer months when traffic volumes on the street system are at their greatest.

Traffic volumes in the Astoria area are highest on the state highways and lowest on the collector streets serving residential areas. Highways 30 and 261101 carry the greatest amount of traffic in Astoria. In 1995, daily traffic volumes ranged between 13,500 and 18,000 vehicles per day (vpd) along Highway 261101 from Warrenton to the Astoria-Megler Bridge. Traffic volumes along Highway 30 reached 18,100 vpd along Marine Drive, east of the Astoria-Megler Bridge, and around 12,800 to 13,800 vpd each way on the one-way couplet downtown. Traffic volumes then tapered off to 14,900 vpd east of the couplet and down to 8,800 vpd, east of Astoria's city limits. In 1995, Highway 202 and Highway 101-Business Route carried a lower but moderate amount of traffic. Volumes range between 3,170 and 8,280 vpd along these two highways.

Other streets which carry a considerable amount of local traffic are the minor arterial streets which form the primary routes for carrying traffic over the hills of Astoria; 7th Street, 8th Street, Irving Avenue, 1 lth Street, Niagara Avenue, 15th Street, Jerome Avenue, and 16th Street. Traffic volumes ranged between 2,780 and 5,8 10 vpd along these roads. Traffic volumes along Exchange Street, east of 16th Street, and along Bond Street, between Columbia Avenue and 8th Street, reached 5,000 and 3,360 vpd, respectively. The two other minor arterial streets, Duane and Exchange Street, located in the downtown core, had traffic volumes ranging between 2,500 and 4,500 vpd.

Most collector streets in the study area had traffic volumes at or below 2,200 vpd, except for the Youngs River Loop Road, south of Miles Crossing, which experienced traffic volumes in excess of 4,000 vpd.

DRAFT 2 7 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Hourly Traffic Patterns

Generally, traffic volumes on Astoria roadways tend to have three peaks each day; an AM peak around 8:OO to 9:00 a.m., a peak around 12:00 to 1:00 p.m., and a PM peak in the late afternoon around 4:00 to 5:00 p.m.

Weekday PM Peak Hour Volumes

From the hourly traffic patterns observed from the road tube and manual turning movement counts, the period of highest activity for an average weekday can be discerned as occurring between 3:00 and 5:30 p.m.; therefore, testing and evaluation of the street system was based on PM peak hour volumes.

Directional PM peak hour volumes for 1995 are shown on Figure 4.

EXISTING (1996) INTERSECTION OPERATIONS

Transportation engineers have established various standards for measuring traffic operations of intersections and roadways. Each standard is associated with a particular level of service (LOS). The LOS concept requires consideration of factors that include, traffic demand, capacity of intersection or street, delay, frequency of interruptions in traffic flow, relative freedom for traffic maneuvers, driving comfort and convenience and operating cost. Six standards have been established ranging from LOS "A" where traffic flow is relatively free- flowing, to LOS "F", where the street system is totally saturated with traffic and movement is very difficult.

From the traffic volumes information collected in 1995, the existing (1996) operations were determined at selected signalized and unsignalized intersections in the Astoria planning area. Selected intersections were analyzed using the Oregon Department of Transportation's SIGCAP-2 software. Selected unsignalized intersections were analyzed using ODOT's UNSIGlO software. Both programs describe the LOS of an intersection in terms of LOS "A" through "F" along with other pertinent information. Detailed results of the operations analyses are located in Appendix A.

Signalized Intersections

Theory developed for use in SIGCAP-2 tries to account for the concept that traffic conditions in a smaller area may be interpreted as being a worse LOS than the same conditions in a larger area. This concept assumes that drivers from each area are willing to tolerate different degrees of congestion. Level of service can be defined by a sliding scale. The part of the scale to use depends upon the metropolitan (community) size. The maximum capacity level (E-F), is the same for all areas.

In SIGCAP-2 the theory behind the concept of LOS is a quantitative measure of the ratio between the existing or projected volumes to the capacity of the roadway at a given location. This ratio is know as Volume-to-Capacity (VIC). The VIC ratios are broken down into six levels and each level is given a letter designation, from A through F, for identification purposes. Table 7 describes the LOS designations for signalized intersections using the SIGCAP2 software.

DRAFT 2 8 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 7 LEVEL OF SERVICE DESIGNATIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

Level of Traffic Flow Comments Maneuverability Service A Free Traffic flows freely with no delays. Drivers can maneuver easily Desirable and find freedom in operation B Stable Traffic still flows smoothly with few Some drivers feel somewhat Desirable delays. restricted within groups of vehicles. C Stable Traffic generally flows smoothly but Backups may develop behind Desirable occasionally vehicles may be delayed turning vehicles. Most drivers through one signal cycle. Desired feel somewhat restricted. urban area design level. D Approaching Traffic delays may be more than one Maneuverability is limited Acceptable Unstable signal cycle during peak hours but during short peak periods due excessive back-ups do not occur. to temporary back-ups. Considered acceptable urban area design level. E Unstable Delay may be great and up to several There are typically long queues Unsatisfactory signal cycles. Short periods of this of vehicles waiting upstream of level may be tolerated during peak the intersections. hours in lieu of the cost and disruption attributed to providing a higher level of service. F Forced Excessive delay causes reduced Traffic is backed up from other Unsatisfactory capacity. Always considered unsatis- locations and may restrict or factory. May be tolerated in prevent movement of vehicles recreational areas where occurrence at the intersection. is rare.

Only one signalized intersection in the Extended Bypass area was selected for analysis in this study; the intersection of Highway 2611 0 1 at Harbor Street in Warrenton. This is the only signalized intersection expected to be impacted by the construction of the Extended Bypass Alignment. Existing (1996) traffic operations analysis reveals that this intersection operates at a LOS of C for the entire intersection. Conditions are for the PM peak hour for an average weekday in June.

A total of eight other signalized intersections in the Astoria were analyzed in the Astoria TSP, with detailed results located in Appendix B of that report..

DRAFT 2 9 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Unsignalized Intersections

Using UNSIG10, the LOS of an unsignalized intersection is determined by the amount of reserve capacity for each approach lane. Table 8 displays the level of service criteria for unsignalized intersections.

TABLE 8 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Reserve Capacity Expected Delay to Level of Service (PCP~) Minor Street Traffic -> 400 A Little or no delay 300-399 B Short traffic delays 200-299 C Average traffic delays 100- 199 D Long traffic delays 0-99 E Very long traffic delays * F *

A total of four unsignalized intersections in the Extended Bypass area were selected for operations analysis. Table 9 displays the results.

TABLE 9 SUMMARY OF LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITICAL UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Location Traffic Movement 1996 Highway 26/101 Hwy. 202/101 Bus. Northbound; Left F Hwy. 101 Bus. Northbound; Left, Through D Southbound; Left, Through D Fort Stevens Hwy. Eastbound; Left, Through C Westbound; Left, Through C Highway 202 7th St. Southbound; Left B Eastbound; Left A

At the intersection of Highway 26/10 1 and Highway 2021101 Business Route (Smith Point), the northbound left turn to proceed through the STOP sign and across the Youngs Bay Bridge currently operates at a LOS of F. A more detailed analysis of this intersection is included under the "Area of special interest" heading later in this report. The combined left-through lanes on the minor approaches of the Highway 101 Business Route and the Fort Stevens Highway at Highway 261101 at are at LOS of E and D, respectively, with major street traffic movements along Highway 261101 at LOS A. The intersection of Highway 2021101 Business Route and 7th Street currently operates at a LOS of A.

DRAFT 30 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 FUTURE TRAFFIC FORECASTS

As part of the extended bypass study, traffic forecasts were performed to predict future traffic conditions for the years 2006 and 2016 both without and with the Extended Bypass. This forecast is part of the forecast developed in the Astoria Transportation System Plan, which also evaluated the Astoria Bypass and Extended Bypass projects as well other major street improvement projects. Only the forecasts pertaining to the traffic conditions under the "No-Build" (no Extended Bypass) and Extended Bypass scenarios were utilized in this study. It should be noted that the Extended Bypass forecast was performed only for alignment A, which utilizes the existing Old Youngs Bay Bridge alignment. Alignment B over Daggett Point was not analyzed because it would not attract as much traffic onto the Extended Bypass and was not selected as the preferred Extended Bypass alternative.

A separate forecast for truck traffic is discussed later in this study and was also performed in the Astoria TSP. After a summary of the methodology used in each forecast, future traffic operations at specific intersections and roadways were then analyzed and discussed. Part of the analysis included identification of existing and future deficiencies in the street system and how the construction of the Extended Bypass will mitigate those deficiencies.

AUTO TRAVEL DEMAND FORECAST

Travel demand forecasting is a method used to predict future traffic conditions in an area, city, or region. This is done to identify where problems will exist in the future along streets and at intersections. Travel forecast models are based on existing and projected future land uses, such as the population and employment in an area. Using a computer modeling program known as EMMEl2, existing and future traffic conditions were simulated on the street network in the Astoria study area, both without and with the planned improvements for the Extended Bypass. The existing (1996) and future year (2006 and 2016) forecasts focused on the PM peak hour which generally occurs between 4:30 and 5:30 PM for an average weekday in Astoria. This is the time period when traffic volumes on the local street system are highest.

In the preliminary stages of the travel forecast, a study area boundary was developed and a survey was done to determine existing and projected future land uses. Once this information was collected the travel forecast model was then developed. Generally, development of a travel demand forecast model involves a four step process: 1) trip generation; 2) trip distribution; 3) trip assignment; and 4) model calibration. Each of these four steps are described as follows including how the study area was defined and a summary of the land use information collected.

STUDY AREA

The study area for the TSP included all of the land within the Astoria Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) plus relevant land outside of the UGB. Figure 4 shows the study area boundary.

Since the study area boundary differs from Astoria's city limits and UGB, it is important to note that, the demographic data contained in this report should not be compared directly with existing data for the city.

DRAFT 3 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Roadway System Network

The limits of the roadway system network for Astoria were defined by a study area boundary. Within this boundary, a network composed of arterial, collector, and major local roads was selected. This network includes all of the state highways, most of the county roads, and city streets which are vital to the circulation of traffic in Astoria.

Each roadway in the network has specific distance, speed, and capacity characteristics which are important factors in the traffic forecasting process. Just as these factors help determine the route that a driver takes when traveling between two locations, they also determine to which route the model assigns a trip.

Transportation Analysis Zones

In addition to defining the study area network, a transportation analysis zone (TAZ) scheme was also developed. The TAZ scheme divides the study area into smaller analysis units which are used to tie land use activity and trip generation to physical locations within the network. Within the study area boundaries, 62 zones were defined, as shown in Figure 4. Physical barriers, roadway locations, and land use characteristics were factors used to determine the zone structure.

Each TAZ is then connected to the network by one or more representative roadways. Since the traffic network does not include every road that exists within the study area, one connector may represent several local roads which are loading onto a main route.

Outside of the study area, seven zones load traffic from external locations, generally traffic from other areas (also shown in Figure 4). These zones produce three types of trips. The first type is through trips which begin in one external zone and end in another external zone but will pass through the city. For example, a vehicle traveling from Seaside, Oregon to Washington will take Highway 26/101 through Astoria to the Astoria Bridge (Highway 101-North). The second type is a trip which begins in the city and ends at another location. An example would be a Astoria resident who works in Seaside. The last type is a trip which begins at another location and ends in the city, i.e. someone who lives in Seaside and shops in Astoria. In the modeling process, the trips traveling to and from these external zones are associated with the actual roads leading into Astoria.

EXISTING AND FUTURE LAND USE

Once the TAZ scheme was defined, existing (1996), and future (2006 and 2016) land use forecasts were developed. The existing land use was used in the model calibration process while future land use was the basis for the future travel forecasts.

Land use is divided into two categories in the travel forecasting model: those uses which produce trips and those uses which attract trips. Population, represented by the number of single-family, multi-family, and manufactured home dwelling units in each TAZ, is the source of trip productions. Employment, broken down by type of land use (i.e. retail/commercial, office, industrial, etc.) is the basis for estimating trip attractions. Table 10 contains a summary of existing and future housing and employment, by land use category. A detailed projection of 1996, 2006, and 2016 land use is included in Appendix B. The year 2006 land use projections were calculated with the

DRAFT 32 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 assumption that population and employment would grow at a linear rate. Therefore, the 10 year or 2006 land use forecast was calculated using half of the increases in population and employment between 1996 and 2016.

TABLE 10 HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT FORECASTS

Land Use 1996 2006 2016 Single-family Dwelling Units 3,134 3,246 3,353 Multi-Family Dwelling Units 2,098 2,136 2,174 Retail/Commercial 1,494 1,522 1,550 Employment Office Employment 1,607 1,665 1,724 Industrial Employment 764 863 962 Government Employment 923 968 1,011 School Employment 3 90 43 6 482 Total Population 1 1,926 12,568 13,201 Total Dwelling Units 5,232 5,3 82 5,527 Total Employees 5,278 5.554 5.829 *Forecasts for area within the study area boundary.

Existing Housing

For the existing (1996) forecast, housing in the city and the surrounding area within the study area totals about 5,232 dwelling units and a population of 11,926. Approximately 60 percent of the existing dwelling units are single-family homes. The remaining housing consists of multi-family housing (40 percent). Population numbers were established using 1990 US Census data and estimated increases in population through the help of city officials.

Year 2016 Housing

Housing for the year 2016 was based on anticipated growth. Although the population forecast for Clatsop County predicts a reduction in the number of residents, city officials anticipate a slight growth over the next 20 years of about 0.5 percent in Astoria. Using this growth rate, housing for the year 2016 is estimated to be at about 5,527 dwelling units. This is an increase of about 295 dwelling units over 1996 housing or an annual growth rate of approximately 0.27 percent. Single-family dwelling units are expected to grow a little faster, reaching approximately 61 percent of the housing market while the market share of multi-family dwelling units will be about 39 percent.

DRAFT 33 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 Existing Employment

Existing employment within the study area totals about 5,278. Employment information was obtained through document research, telephone interviews, and a visual survey of the study area. The visual survey was performed in January 1996 which consisted of driving through most of the TAZs, noting the location and type of employers, estimating employment, and meeting with the City of Astoria planner. Initial employment data was refined using information from the Astoria Chamber of Commerce, the Oregon Employment Department, and other local sources. A number of employers were also contacted by phone to confirm employment and to get information on work shifts, etc.

The 1996 population-to-employment ratio in the study area is approximately 2.3 to 1, indicating a relatively strong employment base. In urban areas, the ratio usually falls between 2.1 and 3.0 to 1.

As indicated, the employment base within the study area is dominated by the retail/commercial and service categories. Approximately 3,101 (59 percent) of the jobs in the study area are related to the retail and service industry. Industrial employees comprise another 764 jobs (14 percent).

Year 2016 Employment

Retail and service employment is expected to increase by 5.6 percent from about 3,101 employees to 3,274 employees. Industrial employment is also expected to increase by 26.0 percent from 764 employees to 962 employees. Other employment levels, such as school and government, would also grow to support the increase in --- population.

TRIP GENERATION

Vehicle trip generation, the first step in the modeling process, is a method of estimating the number and type of trips a specific land use will produce or attract based on historic data and surveys of similar developments. The trip generation estimates were made for each TAZ in the planning area on the basis of the type and quantity of households and employees. Trip generation rates applied to these land uses were derived from several sources, including the Institute of Transportation Engineers report, "Trip Generation" (Fifth Edition, 1991) and the Transportation Research Board Report 17. These rates were modified to reflect generalized land use categories for planning purposes on the basis of experience in other similar size cities and through the travel model calibration process.

Each trip is defined by the land use from which it is produced or originated, the land use to which it is attracted or destined, and the purpose of the trip. Trip generation rates were refined for each origin and destination for four purposes:

Home-based work - Trips between home and a place of employment. Home-based shopping - Trips between home and a commercial land use. Home-based other - Trips between home and another land use for a purpose other than employment and commercial (e.g. school trips). Non-home based - Trips between two non-residential land uses.

DRAFT 34 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 A table in Appendix A summarizes the trip rates for each land use category and for each trip purpose.

TRZP DISTRIBUTION

Vehicle trip distribution, the second step in the modeling process, is a method of estimating the origin and destination of trips within the study area. For each TAZ, trip origins were distributed to all of the trip destinations within the planning area and to the roads leading out of the study area.

A gravity model was used for trip distribution. The basic premise of this gravity model is that the number of trips between two areas is directly related to the size of the attractions or destinations in each zone and inversely related to the travel length between each zone. For example, if two destination zones of different sizes were located equal driving times from the origin zone, more trips would be distributed to the larger destination zone. And if two destination zones of equal size were located 5 minutes and 10 minutes from the origin zone, more trips would be distributed to the closer destination zone. This procedure was followed for trips originating in all 62 internal zones and the roads leading into the study area.

TRIP ASSIGNMENT

Trip assignment, the third step in the modeling process, is a method of assigning trips distributed between origin zones and destination zones to specific paths on the street system. The forecasting model, EMMEf2, used a capacity-constrained assignment methodology which assigns traffic to the street system based on travel time. Initially the model assigns each trip to the route with the shortest travel time between its origin and destination. - - The travel time on each route is then adjusted to account for congestion and delay which may result from the first assignment. As the fastest route becomes congested, its travel time increases. If the travel time increases substantially, another parallel route may become faster. The model then adjusts the traffic assignments by reassigning traffic to the alternate route. Through an iterative process, the model balances travel times and traffic volumes between alternate routes. Using this procedure, the traffic between a single originldestination pair could be assigned to several routes depending on the congestion of each route, thereby, simulating "real world" motorists' choices.

MODEL CALIBRATION

Before projecting 2016 traffic volumes, the entire process of estimating trip generation, distribution, and assignment was completed for 1996 conditions and compared with actual measurements on the roadway system. The theory behind calibration reasons that if the modeling process forecasts current conditions reasonably well, the same process should then provide a reasonably good estimate of future conditions. To calibrate the model, changes to the trip generation, distribution, and assignment process were made until the assigned volumes approach actual counts, generally within about ten percent of counts. A more detailed description of the calibration process is discussed in Appendix C.

DRAFT 35 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 2006 AND 2016 FORECASTS

After the calibration of the model, future year forecasts were run for the years 2006 and 2016. These forecasts were then evaluated to identify any street and intersection deficiencies that will exist in the next 10 to 20 years. These deficiencies are discussed in the Future Traffic Operations section which follows this forecasts section.

The ten year (2006) traffic forecast was determined using a combination of the existing (1996) and projected additional (2006) land use datum. Using this new land use for the year 2006, the same steps used in the 1996 forecast were repeated, using trip generation, distribution and finally the assignment of all trips.

The twenty year (2016) traffic forecast was performed in the same manner as the future year (2006) traffic forecast.

Future year forecasts were first performed using the existing transportation network. These forecasts, categorized as the "No-Build" scenarios, assume that no major changes would be made to the existing transportation system in the next 10 or 20 years. The "No Build" scenarios establish the baseline for all other analysis.

An additional forecast, which included the Extended Bypass, was then performed for the years 2006 and 2016 using EMMEl2. This was one of five major street improvement projects explored in the Astoria TSP. The other four scenarios include:

Astoria Bypass (Across the Youngs Bay Bridge) Extension of the Existing One-Way Couplet Downtown Establishing Duane Street and Exchange Street as Two-Way Streets in the Downtown Area Decoupling the Downtown Area Forecast results for the "No-Build" and Extended Bypass scenarios are located in Appendix D of this report. Results for the other four scenarios are located in Appendix E of the Astoria TSP. Forecast results are expressed in terms of PM peak hour traffic volumes. In some areas of Astoria, the volume-to-capacity ratios were plotted as well.

FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AT SPECIFIC INTERSECTIONS

Future traffic operations were estimated at selected key intersections using the traffic model forecasts. A total of nine signalized and seven unsignalized intersections were selected for analysis. These intersections were already evaluated under existing (1996) conditions as mentioned previously.

Signalized Intersections

Future operations at two signalized intersections in the Extended Bypass area were determined using the turning movement volume output from the EMME12 model. The differences in traffic between future (2006 or 2016) model runs, which include the No-Build and the Extended Bypass Alternative scenarios, and the calibrated (1996) model run were applied to actual base turning movement counts performed in June of 1995. SIGCAP-2 was then

used to analyze future traffic operations at the nine signalized intersections. The results are displayed in. Table. 11 and include the Level-of-Service and Saturation Values. Saturation Va'lues are defined in Appendix A.

DRAFT 36 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 11 FUTURE LEVELS OF SERVICE AND SATURATION VALUES (X) AT SELECTED SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Location Traffic 1996 2006 2006 2016 2016 Movement No-Build Extended No-Build Extended Bypass Bypass Hwy 26/10] Harbor St. All C (67%) C-D (72%) C (69%) D (79%) C-D (72%) Portway St. All B (55%) B (57%) B (55%) B (59%) B (58%)

This shows that the Harbor Street intersection will operate at an acceptable level of service (D or better)for an urban location under all of the scenarios analyzed.

Results for the future No-Build operations for the years 2006 and 2016 in the Astoria TSP show that the LOS of several of the signalized intersections in Astoria will deteriorate below the minimum level of service D requirement in the Oregon Highway Plan. However, with the construction of the Astoria Bypass and Extended Bypass, the operations of these intersections in the years 2006 and 2016 will be maintained at a LOS of D or better, which is close to existing conditions.

Unsignalized Intersections

Future traffic operations were also determined at four unsignalized intersections in the Extended Bypass area

-- under the same conditions using the UNSIGIO program. Future traffic volumes were determined at these intersections using the turning movement count summaries produced from the EMME12 model. Base count information was obtained at three of the four intersections; Highway 261101 at Highway 101-Bus. and the Fort Stevens Highway and at Highway 202 and 7th Street. Future traffic volumes were determined at these three intersections by, first, determining the differences in traffic between future (2006 or 2016) model runs, which include the No-Build and the Extended Bypass Alternative scenarios, and the calibrated (1996) model run. These differences in traffic were then applied to base turning movement counts. The future (2006 and 2016) traffic volumes were taken directly from the EMME12 model output for the Miles Crossing (Lewis and Clark Road) intersection. The projected operations at all four intersections are summarized in Table 12.

DRAFT 37 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 12 FUTURE LEVELS OF SERVICE AT SELECTED UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Location Traffic Movement 1996 2006 2006 2016 2016 No-Build Extended No-Build Extended Bypass Bypass Hwy 26/10 1 Hwy. 101 Bus. Northbound; Left, Through E E E F E Southbound; Left, Through E E E F E Fort Stevens Eastbound; Left, Through D E C F D Hwy. Westbound; Left, Through D E D F E Hwy. 101 Business Miles Crossing (Lewis and Clark Rd.) Hwy 202 7th St. Southbound; Left A B D C E Eastbound; Left A A A A A

Existing traffic operations are at LOS E for the northbound and southbound left and through movements at the intersection of Highway 261101 and the Highway 10 1-Business Route. This LOS is expected to deteriorate to F by the year 201 6 even with the Astoria Bypass constructed. Construction of the Extended Bypass would maintain operations at LOS E in the year 201 6.

Existing traffic operations are at LOS D for the eastbound and westbound left and through movements at the intersection of Highway 261101 at the Fort Stevens Highway. By the year 2016 the traffic operations for these movements are expected to deteriorate to LOS F with or without the Astoria Bypass. However, with the construction of the Extended Bypass, a LOS of D would result for the eastbound movement and a LOS of E for the westbound movement.

Existing and future No-Build traffic operations at the 7th Street intersection with Highway 202 will be at a LOS of C or better. However, the southbound left-turn movement will decay to a LOS of D in 2006 and LOS of E in 20 16 with the installation of the Extended Bypass and or the Astoria Bypass.

Similar to the signalized intersection analysis the construction of the Astoria Bypass and Extended Bypass would improve the level of service to acceptable levels for several of the unsignalized intersections east of Smith Point analyzed in the Astoria TSP. The unsignalized intersection of Highway 20211 0 1 -Business Route and Highway 261101 at Smith Point was not included in the analysis above. A separate analysis was performed at this intersection located in a following section below (Areas of Special Interest), along with potential intersection improvements.

FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ALONG SPECIFIC STREETS

Inspection of existing and projected traffic volumes on the street network and analysis of the intersection operations indicate that several problem areas 'currently exist or will e'xist in the future along specific 'street

DRAFT 3 8 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 segments. These streets were evaluated based on projected traffic volumes and the Volume-to-Capacity (VIC) ratios for all time periods and street improvement projects. In each case, the deficiencies of these street segments and intersections are dependent upon the implementation of certain street improvement projects such as the Astoria Bypass alternatives.

Existing and Future No-Build Conditions

Analysis of existing traffic volumes and VIC ratios from the EMMEl2 model reveal that two roadway segments in the Extended Bypass area currently experience heavy traffic flow with vlc ratios close to or over 1.0 during the PM peak hour for a typical weekday of a summer month. Future year forecasts for the years 2006 and 2016 along these street segments reveal that these conditions will become worse without any street system improvements.

One roadway segment currently experiencing heavy traffic flow is from Smith Point where Highway 261101 and Highway 2021101-Business Route intersect to the southwest across the New Youngs Bay Bridge. According to the calibrated EMME12 traffic model, current (1996) PM peak hour volumes reached 1017 vehicles in the southwest direction along this section of highway. This traffic volume is a combination of 786 vph originating from Marine Drive to the northeast and 231 vph originating from Highway 2021101-Business Route to the southeast. A capacity of 830 vehicles per hour in each direction was initially assumed for this highway segment immediately west of the Smith Point intersection based on the posted speed of 30 mph and the functional classification of the roadway as a principle arterial. Using this capacity, a VIC ratio of 1.22 was computed for the southwest direction, indicating heavy congestion. By the year 2016, without any street improvements, traffic volumes are expected to reach 1244 in the southwest direction, which equates to a VIC ratio of 1SO. However the capacity in this section would be expected to be higher than this since there are no side streets or driveways west of Smith Point.

Across the Youngs Bay Bridge the capacity and assumed operating speed were increased to 1800 vph in each direction and 55 mph over the bridge. These properties were used in the EMME12 model because they closely resemble free flow conditions without traffic interruptions at intersections of driveways. With this capacity and current traffic demand VIC ratios of 0.565 and 0.539 exist for the westbound and eastbound lanes, respectively. This indicates mild congestion, but smooth traffic flow across the Youngs Bay Bridge. Specific capacity issues for the Smith Point intersection were analyzed and are addressed in the next section below (Areas of Special Interest).

The second location is also located along Highway 261101 between the southwest end of the Youngs Bay Bridge and Harbor Street. This is a two-lane section of highway with a posted speed of 45 mph and an initially assumed capacity of 900 vph. According to the traffic model, current (1 996) PM peak hour volumes reached 1017 vehicles (VIC ratio of 1.10) in the southwest direction and 971 vehicles (VIC ratio of 1.05) in the northeast direction. Several factors indicate that the capacity of this section of highway is actually higher than the initially estimated 900 vph. Since there is only one driveway in this section of highway, it functions close to "ideal" or uninterrupted-flow conditions. Results from the SIGCAP-2 signalized traffic operations analysis indicated a LOS of C currently exists at the Harbor Street intersection with Highway 101126. The results also show that the entire approach to this intersection from the Youngs Bay Bridge can maintain a LOS of C with traffic volumes of up to 1904 vph, which is roughly double the amount of traffic currently on this approach.

Future forecasts for the years 2006 and 2016 under "No-Build" conditions (no bypass) reveal that traffic volumes will increase steadily along Highway 261101 over the New Youngs Bay Bridge. At the same time there would not be much of an increase in local traffic on the Highway 101-Business Route over the Old Youngs Bay Bridge, DRAFT 39 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 which could act as an alternative route between Astoria and the areas of Warrenton and Seaside. The main reason for this projected occurrence is because the travel time between the SeasideIWarrento~~areas and most of the Astoria area will still be quicker using Highway 261101 over the Youngs Bay Bridge. This route is in most cases shorter in distance and has a higher average speed than the Highway 101-Business Route.

Future Conditions with the Astoria Bypass

Construction of the Astoria Bypass involves a new highway linking together Highway 30 just west of the John Day River Bridge and Highway 202 near Williamsport Road. This section of the bypass will consist of a two-lane facility with additional climbing lanes, limited access and a design speed of 55 mph. From Williamsport Road, the bypass will proceed northwest along the existing Highway 202 alignment to Smith Point where it will proceed across the Youngs Bay Bridge and on to the Warrenton and Seaside areas. Future forecasts and analysis for this alternative to the Astoria Bypass are detailed in the Astoria TSP in Chapter 6 (Forecasting) and Appendix D.

Future Conditions with the Extended Bypass

A variation to the Astoria Bypass, known as the Extended Bypass (alignment A), will proceed along the initial bypass alignment, between Highway 30 and Williamsport Road, turning south along Highway 101 Business Route across the Old Youngs Bay Bridge. From there it will continue west across the Lewis and Clark Bridge. A new roadway extension is planned south of the Astoria Airport where the existing highway alignment turns west to north. This extension will connect the Highway 101-Business Route and Highway 26/101 directly with an

- east-west link.

Overall travel speeds across the Old Youngs Bay Bridge are expected to increase from 35 to 55 mph as a result of upgrading the bridge. The section of road west of the Lewis and Clark Bridge will also be upgraded with an estimated travel speed of 55 mph.

Forecast results for the year 2016 under conditions which include the "No-Build" and Extended Bypass with Astoria Bypass scenarios reveal that a significant shift in travel patterns will take place as a result of the Extended Bypass project. First of all it is estimated that roughly 76 percent of the total traffic on Highway 30 east of Astoria will use the new bypass extension instead of using the existing Highway 30 alignment heading into the downtown area. Year 2016 PM peak hour traffic volumes along Highway 30, northwest of the proposed bypass intersection, are projected to decrease from 454 to 149 vehicles westbound and 524 to 110 vehicles eastbound, with a majority of the differences in traffic now accessing the bypass (380 vehicles westbound and 490 vehicles eastbound).

This shift will also have noticeable effects along the critical section of Marine Drive east of the existing one-way couplet. Traffic volumes in the year 2016 without and with the bypass during the PM peak hour just east of 23rd Street will decrease from 760 to 400 vehicles westbound and from 971 to 529 vehicles eastbound. This results in a V/Cratio of 0.47 westbound and 0.62 eastbound, which is well under capacity. Traffic volumes along Marine Drive east of 16th Street will reduce from 1049 to 988 vehicles westbound and from 961 to 854 vehicles eastbound according to the forecast results. This reduction is not as significant because an alternative parallel route exists along Exchange Street to the south. According to the traffic model, traffic flows will reduce along Exchange Street east of 16th Street from 463 to 205 vehicles westbound and from 390' to 96 vehicles eastbound. This is a significant reduction on Exchange Street by the hospital. Even though future traffic volumes with the

DRAFT 40 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 bypass would remain high along the section of Marine Drive at 16th Street, the overall reduction in traffic resulting from the bypass will eliminate much congestion and allow Marine Drive to function better.

Due to the planned improvements associated with the Extended Bypass alternative along the Highway 101- Business Route, the Extended Bypass route over the Old Youngs Bay Bridge will become more attractive to some drivers than Highway 261101 across the Youngs Bay Bridge. In a comparison of the traffic forecasts for the year 2016 between the "No-Build" and Extended Bypass scenarios, a significant amount of traffic will shift from the Youngs Bay Bridge to the Old Youngs Bay Bridge. Table 13 displays the PM peak hour traffic volumes at these locations for both scenarios.

TABLE 13 2016 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Location No-Build (no Bypass) Extended Bypass Northbound Southbound Northbound Southbound Old Youngs Bay Bridge 297 393 538 560 (Highway 10 1-Business Route) Youngs Bay Bridge 1157 1244 9 18 1078 (Highway 2611 01)

The results from the forecast show that during the PM peak hour essentially 24 1 vehicles proceeding northbound (into Astoria) and 167 vehicles proceeding southbound (out of Astoria) will shift from the Youngs Bay Bridge to the Old Youngs Bay Bridge crossing, thus, using the Highway 101-Business Route as an alternative to Highway 261101. Half of this traffic is estimated to be through traffic between Highway 30 east of Astoria and Highway 261101 from Seaside which will use the entire Extended Bypass alignment.

This amount of traffic projected to shift away from Highway 26110 1 to the Highway 101-Business Route is essentially the projected additional traffic between now (1996) and the year 2016. Construction of the Extended Bypass will bring estimated 2016 traffic volumes along Highway 261101 between Smith Point and Warrenton back to 1996 levels. This will help prevent any future congestion along Highway 261101 at the two problem areas along this highway.

AREA OF SPECIAL INTEREST

Smith Point is one area in Astoria which has garnered special attention because of its location, use, or type of proposed improvement. The Extended Bypass would divert a substantial amount of traffic away from this area. This section describes this area and the issues raised.

Smith Point

Smith Point is the intersection of Highway 2611 0 1 and Highway 20211 0 1 -Business Route. Additional traffic generated over the next 20 years will require that this intersection be redesigned. In all scenarios, the intersection will be well, above capacity if no improvements are made. Two major intersection redesign schemes were examined for this intersection to provide the additional capacity needed to serve traffic demands until 2016. These schemes were a roundabout and a signalized intersection.

DRAFT 4 1 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 A signalized intersection entails widening the roadway, installing a signal, and maintaining the signal. Signalized intersections can handle higher volumes of traffic more safely than an unsignalized intersection. This would make all three legs of the intersection stop in succession, with some protected turning movements.

For an unsignalized version of this intersection, Highway 261101 would remain as it currently is with a stop sign located on the southern approach of Highway 2021101-Business Route.

Roundabouts are becoming increasingly popular in the United States and are commonly used in European countries and Australia. As compared to the old traffic circles which have mostly been replaced, a roundabout is a large traffic circle which can channel high volumes of traffic through an intersection. Cars enter the roundabout and travel counter clockwise, exiting the roundabout when they come to the road going the direction they wish to go. Roundabouts serve several functions mostly centering around slowing traffic through an intersection without stopping it.. The first is they handle larger numbers of vehicles than signalized intersections. The second is that by slowing traffic without stopping it roundabouts make the overall delay of a vehicle at the intersection less than in the case of a signalized intersection. The third effect of roundabouts is an increase in the safety of an intersection, this is accomplished because drivers are more aware of the intersection as they approach it, are traveling more slowly through the intersection, and vehicles rarely collide with each other at right angles or during turning movements by reducing the number of conflict points to a figure equal of the number of lanes the roundabout serves ( Chapter Five of the Astoria TSP report discusses conflict points).

A roundabout would serve this intersection well because it would slow northbound traffic entering town, make the intersection safer and reduce delay considerably. This is evidenced when compared with both a signalized and an unsignalized intersection with the same projected traffic volumes as shown by the analysis in the table which follows.

The analysis in the following table was made using SIDRA 5 software (Signalized & unsignalized Intersection Design and Research Aid) which was developed in Australia. It has over 130 users in the United States and Canada and is based on the calibration of model parameters with the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual which is commonly used. For the Smith Point roundabout analysis the roundabout was 100 foot inside diameter with two travel lanes. This would result in an outside diameter of approximately 140 feet for the roundabout which would fit within the existing right-of-way.

The results of the analysis are that a temporary traffic signal without added left-turn lanes would be over capacity (level of service F) within 20 years. This means there would be long intersection delays both with or without the Astoria Bypass. However with the Extended Bypass the additional lanes would not be required and the intersection would operate at level of service B with a traffic signal. The roundabout option provides the best level of service and operations at Smith Point for all options analyzed with the lowest level of service being B for the No-Build (no other transportation improvements assumed) option. With both the Extended Bypass and the roundabout the level of service in 20 years would be level of service A.

DRAFT 42 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 TABLE 14 SMITH POINT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Delay LOS Oution with Roundabouts S E N INT S E N INT 1. 1996 Existing Conditions 12.1 16.7 12.7 13.1 A A A A 2. 2006 No Build 12.1 17.5 12.9 13.3 A A A A 4. 2006 Extended Bypass (Old Young's Bay) 12.2 15 13.9 13.4 A A A A 5. 2016 No Build 13 23.3 14.6 15.7 A B A A 7. 2016 Extended Bypass (Old Young's Bay) 12.3 14.8 13.3 13.2 A A A A Option with Signalization Delay LOS No Left Turn Bay S E N INT S E N INT 1. 1996 Existing Conditions 9.9 26.3 23 18.1 B B C B 2. 2006 No Build 11.1 29.8 31 22.5 B B C B 4. 2006 Extended Bypass (Old Young's Bay) 10.5 27.1 23.1 18.9 B B C B 5. 2016 No Build 18.4 42 472 206 B C F F 7. 2016 Extended Bypass (Old Young's Bay) 10.5 3 1.4 3 1.9 22.6 B C C B

TRUCK TRAFFIC FORECAST

As part of the Extended Bypass study, a forecast for truck traffic was performed separate from the travel demand forecast described above in the previous section. This involved a quantitative evaluation of truck traffic along existing truck routes and a potential new truck route created by the Extended Bypass. Existing and projected truck traffic was determined for the years 1996, 2006 and 2016 which are also the years for the auto traffic forecasts made. Truck traffic was evaluated in terms of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) using a 50/50 directional split in truck volumes along all truck routes. Forecasts for each scenario involved estimating total truck volumes, generated inside the study area and at external locations, along with the methodology used to distribute and assign all truck traffic. Each step in the forecasting process is described in Appendix D. For the year 2006 and 201 6 scenarios, truck traffic volumes were determined under the "No-Build" conditions without any street improvements and conditions with the Extended Bypass alternative. Results from this analysis were used to assess any future impacts to the street system resulting from the Extended Bypass alternative.

RESULTS OF TRUCK TRAFFIC FORECAST

Results of the truck traffic forecast for the existing, "No-Build", and Extended Bypass alternatives are illustrated in Figures 5 through 9 and described below. Truck traffic volumes displayed in each figure are the same in each direction and are for an average weekday during the peak summer month of June.

Existing Conditions

During June of 1995 it is estimated that, in each direction, between 710 and 950 trucks passed through the downtown core of Astoria along Marine Drive on an average weekday. It is also estimated that roughly 80 percent of this traffic is related to external truck traffic, most of which are trucks using Highway 30 to the east. This highway carries about 850 trucks in and out of Astoria daily. In each direction, about 548 trucks per day use

DRAFT 43 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 the Youngs Bay Bridge crossing along Highway 261101. This crossing currently serves as the quickest truck route linking the Warrenton area and Highway 261101 from Seaside to the Astoria area, Highway 101 into Washington, and Highway 30 leading east towards Portland. Another 126 trucks per day, in each direction, use Old Youngs Bay Bridge along the Highway 101-Business Route. This route may be considerably longer for some truckers because of the existing alignment and connectivity with the rest of the highway system.

It was determined from manual turning movement counts that approximately 84 trucks per day pass over the hills of Astoria between Highway 30 in the downtown area and Highway 202 instead of using Marine Drive around Smith Point. These trucks mostly originate from or are destined to the Lewis and Clark Road and Highway 202 external stations.

No-Build Scenario

The 2006 and 2016 year scenarios reveal that the section of Highway 30 from the Astoria Bridge heading east towards Portland will experience heavy truck traffic. Truck volumes are expected to reach between 1220 and 1340 trucks a day each way in 2006 and between 1664 and 1832 trucks a day each way by the year 2016. Year 2016 truck traffic along this Highway is roughly double the current truck traffic. Without the Astoria Bypass, most trucks will still use the Youngs Bay Bridge crossing on Highway 2611 0 1 (1 056 trucks daily each way) rather than the Old Youngs Bay Bridge on the Highway 101-Business Route (220 trucks daily each way).

Truck traffic using the truck route over the hills of Astoria are expected to increase by about 50% in 2006 (120 trucks daily each way) and about twice the existing size by the year 2016 (1 68 trucks daily each way).

Extended Bypass

Construction of the Extended Bypass will dramatically reduce the amount of trucks passing through the northern portion of Astoria along Highway 30 and Highway 261101 from the John Day River Bridge where the bypass begins all the way to Smith Point. All trucks along Highway 30 east of Astoria, except trucks making local deliveries in the city, will be rerouted onto the new bypass and will access Highway 202 near Williamsport Road. This includes all trucks destined for Odell, Seaside, Warrenton, and the State of Washington.

Year 2016 forecast results reveal that with the Extended Bypass in place, the overall range of traffic volumes along Highway 30 and Highway 261101 in the downtown area will decrease from 1832 and 1266 to 794 and 184 trucks per day in each direction. Truck traffic along the one-way couplet is projected to decrease from 916 to 92 trucks per day each way.

Another major shift in truck traffic is expected to take place on the two bridges crossing Youngs Bay as a result of the Extended Bypass project. Highway 261101 over the Youngs Bay Bridge will experience a reduction in truck traffic volumes from 1056 to 264 trucks per day each way. A majority of this reduction is related to truck traffic between the Warrenton and Seaside areas and Highway 30 east of Astoria and is projected to shift over to the Highway 101-Business Route over the Old Youngs Bay Bridge. This shift is expected to increase truck traffic over the Old Youngs Bay Bridge from 220 to 10 16 trucks per day each way.

Construction of the Astoria Bypass will provide a new route for all trucks traveling between Highway 30, east of Astoria, and the State of Washington as well as trucks related to the potential reopening of the port. Trucks will no longer travel through the downtown area of Astoria along Marine Drive (Highway 30), but will be rerouted

DRAFT 44 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 south to Smith Point, along Highway 2021101-Business Route, to the bypass. With the bypass constructed, truck traffic volumes are expected to increase from 278 to 530 trucks per day each way along Highway 2021101- Business Route in the year 20 16.

Year 2006 truck traffic forecasts for the "No-Build" and Extended Bypass scenarios indicate a similar trend in truck traffic pattern changes.

This Extended Bypass alignment will provide a well balanced truck route system in that the improved Highway 101-Business Route will direct trucks across Old Youngs Bay Bridge instead of Youngs Bay Bridge. Currently, the capacity of the Business route roadway is under-utilized and future traffic forecasts reveal that it will remain this way. Portions of Highway 261101, at the east and west ends of the Youngs Bay Bridge, are rapidly approaching the highway's capacity. Routing all trucks along the Highway 101-Business Route will lower truck volumes along Highway 261101 and slow the increasing congestion along this roadway.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed Extended Bypass alignment would alleviate several major transportation concerns that would impact future transportation in the Clatsop County, City of Astoria and Warrenton areas. A major issue is the two existing moveable span bridges on the preferred Extended Bypass alignment. Both the Old Youngs Bay and Lewis and Clark bridges will require major expenditures or replacement over the next 25 years and neither structure meets current earthquake standards. The Old Youngs Bay Bridge also serves as a possible alternate route to the City of Astoria in case the Youngs Bay Bridge on Highway 101 is closed. Both of the bridges on Highway 101 Business are inadequate in width to handle both bicycle and pedestrian traffic.

As a result of the investigation of natural resources on the proposed Extended Bypass alignments it was found that wetlands are along the existing and preferred bypass alignment for approximately 12,000 feet or 2.25 miles. The total distance to be constructed excluding the two bridges would be approximately 5.8 miles. Almost 40 percent of the extended bypass could have impacts on wetlands and this percentage could be higher if the roadside ditches are also declared wetlands as was previously discussed in this report. Wetlands are the major natural resource concern for the Extended Bypass alignment.

The Extended Bypass would attract a substantial amount of truck and automobile traffic off of Highway 202 in front of the Astoria High School and away from the Smith Point intersection and the Youngs Bay Bridge on Highway 101. It would also serve as a good alternate route for bicycles to use to get to the City of Astoria and would provide better pedestrian facilities. The route would be an alternate route for emergency vehicles to access the City of Astoria area in case Highway 10 1 is closed.

Cost is another major issue that needs consideration for the Extended Bypass. The total estimated cost to construct the Extended Bypass is approximately $47,000,000. This cost is as much as the Astoria Bypass as proposed in the draft Environmental Impact Statement. By far the largest part of the cost is for the two bridges that will need to be addressed regardless of whether or not the Extended Bypass is constructed. The estimated cost for constructing and reconstructing the 5.8 miles of roadway with a grade separation (interchange) at Highway 101 is over $8,000,000. These costs do not include additional right-of-way required which will be minimal except for the new alignment at the west end to Highway 101 and the new alignment west of Miles Crossing

DRAFT 45 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997 In conclusion the Extended Bypass would be very desirable for the future transportation system if the wetlands and cost issues can be resolved. The additional cost for construction of the needed roadway improvements is not that much in comparison to the costs for the two bridges which will need to be addressed.

DRAFT 46 Extended Bypass Alignment Study April 1997