|
The Sellwood Bridge project is a planning effort to develop a community-supported solution that addresses the
long-term transportation deficiencies posed by deterioration of the bridge. Because the study involves federal
funds, Multnomah County and its local, state, and federal agency partners followed a National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) planning process. NEPA is a 1969 federal law that ensures that governments give proper
consideration to the environment (natural and human) before undertaking major projects that will require federal
funds to build.
This section of the website describes the NEPA planning process that the county followed from 2006 through 2010.
For the Sellwood Bridge project, Multnomah County prepared an
environmental impact statement (EIS)
to comply with NEPA. An EIS is a document that determines the significance of social, economic, or
environmental impacts of a proposed project. The EIS summarizes the major environmental impacts,
outlines issues, examines reasonable alternatives, and identifies a preferred alternative for the
project. A Notice of Intent
to prepare the EIS was published on the Federal Register on November 9, 2006.
The project has been guided by a structured decision-making process
with input from a Community Task Force (CTF), Project Management Team (PMT), and Policy Advisory Group (PAG).
The decision process was organized into six major decision milestones as identified on this timeline graphic (click on the image below to enlarge it):
Click on the Decision Points below to read more about each.
|
1. Establish Decision
Process and Structure
This first decision point ensured understanding and agreement about how decisions
were made – what process will be followed and the roles, responsibilities, and
membership of the various groups.
This decision point was formally reached on June 7, 2006, by the Policy Advisory Group. The
Decision-Making Structure and Process memo has
been finalized and will be used throughout the project.
|
2. Define Purpose and Need
This decision point defined the problem to be solved and established a factual, defensible
basis for why the problem is authentic and important. It defined the specific transportation
needs that provided the framework for future work.
The Purpose and Need Statement, was recommended by the Community Task Force
and adopted by the Policy Advisory Group, then went to the agencies for concurrence.
A presentation regarding the Purpose and Need was given to the Community Task Force, along with the Structural
Deficiencies and Roadway Deficiencies memos.
The bridge has numerous deficiencies, including:
- Poor structural condition, with a limited service life
- Weight restrictions, which have forced an average of 1,400 trucks and buses each
day to find a different river crossing route
- Geologic instability on the west end that has resulted in land slides
- Narrow travel lanes with no shoulders or median
- Short stopping distances and lines of sight for motorists
- Traffic that is at capacity during rush hours
- One narrow sidewalk insufficient for bicyclists and pedestrians
- Poor connections to established trails at each end of the bridge
- Tight ramps at west end that cannot easily accommodate large vehicles
- High risk of structural failure in the event of an earthquake
- A National Bridge Inventory sufficiency rating of 2 out of a possible score of 100
|
3. Establish Evaluation Framework
This decision point created a “tool” to assist with assessing and comparing alternatives.
The evaluation framework “tool” set criteria and quantitative performance measures
for gauging the effectiveness of alternatives — how well they solved the identified
problems and how well they performed against the broad range of stakeholder values.
The Evaluation Framework
was adopted by the Policy Advisory Group on January 29, 2007.
|
4. Develop Alternatives
This point in the decision process determined the full range of alternatives to be considered.
The aim was to ensure that stakeholders’ ideas got a chance to
play out as concepts and were put on
the table for consideration. Any alternatives that do not meet the minimum requirements or are clearly
inferior to the other alternatives were eliminated.
The Community Task Force recommended and the Policy Advisory Group adopted a list of
alternatives
to be considered in June 2007.
|
5. Screen Alternatives
This decision point evaluated the alternatives against the criteria developed by the Community Task Force
(Evaluation Framework)
to see which ones performed better. The Alternative Evaluation Memo
explains this process in more detail. As part of this step, a small group of selected alternatives was given a more detailed analysis in the
environmental impact statement (EIS).
The Policy Advisory Group adopted, on October 19,
five alternatives
to be considered in the Draft EIS.
|
6. Select Preferred Alternative
During the sixth decision point, detailed data developed for the
Draft EIS was used to re-evaluate the remaining
alternatives against the evaluation framework. The public was asked to participate in the selection
of a preferred alternative.
In January and February 2009, the CTF and PAG recommended and selected a
preferred alternative.
The preferred alternative recommendation was approved by the partner agencies (Multnomah County,
City of Portland, Metro, ODOT and Clackamas County) in early 2009.
|
|
|
Extensive public outreach occurred prior to each of these decision points to ensure that the public
was involved in the process in a meaningful way. The public had the opportunity to comment on issues
before the various project groups made recommendations at each decision point.
Your input helped shape the parameters of this
project; thank you for your time and interest in the project.
What’s happening now?
The Preferred Alternative is being refined and a Final EIS is being prepared (including responding to
comments that were submitted about the Draft EIS). Refinements are being made to the plan to ensure
it complies with local, state and federal regulations. Approval by FHWA is expected in late summer
2010.
|
|
The Sellwood Bridge project is a planning effort to develop a locally-supported
alternative to address the long-term transportation deficiencies posed by deterioration of the bridge.
|
