r~ PROJECT PROSPECTUS

'\::...1 Part 1 - Project Request (Page 1 of 2)
Key Number: Jurisdiction:
16449 Citv of Portland =
Secllon: Portland Bikeway Signage and Striping Region: Area: District:
1 Portland Area ~N2B/2C
State Highway No.: Highway Name: Mile Point Length: (MI)
n/a various From: To: 53
0 Urban City: MPO: IWithin 0 Yes County: Road/Street Name:
D Rural Portland P UGB D No Multnomah various
Route No.: NHS D YES HPMS: FC: Applicant (If other than State).:
n/a 0 NO 4 20 City of Portland
us Congressional District: State Senate District: State Representative District:
135 1417-1921-24 273335363841-50
COc~t I3slimat~s~f(~){,$/~~OcOO) PrOject ,Com:ponenls Right/Of Way ~
Preliminary Engineering $ 100 Grading Flies (#) 0
Right Of Way $ - Paving Acres (#) 0
Utility Reimbursement $ - Structures Relocations (#) 0
Signing X Acquisitions (#) 0
Roadway $ 800 Signals Easements (#) 0
Structures Illumination Wo)"k By: Slale I Consultant 11Ippllcant
Signals Detour Preliminary Engineering (S,C,A) A
Illumination Construction Engineering (S,C,A) A
Temp. Protection Right of Way Descriptions (S,C,A) NJA
Cons!. Contingencies Right Of Way Acquisitions (S,C,A) N/A
Cons!. Engineering $ 100 Prpject Categoftes 'to~sfrudtetl By
Detour Environmental Class (1,2,3. PCE) peE 0 Contract D County Force
Design Category (1-7) 07
Total CE and Construction: $ 900 Work Type Code (1-13) 08 D State Force D Other
Total Estimate: $ 1,000 Primary STiP Work Type: BIKPED D City Force

Recommended Let Date By Federal Fiscal Year (Quarter-Year): I 4th Qtr 2009
PE Fund: ARRA RlWFund: N/A URFund: N/A CE-CN Fund: ARRA
PE EA: RlWEA: UREA: CE-CN EA:
Item Existing Proposed Define The Problem:
Travel Lanes (#) n/a n/a Portland's bicycle boulevards and local city bikeways currently lack sufficient wayfinding to
direct bicycle users to lower volume streets. Without the wayfinding, bicyclists use major
Structures (#) nfa n/a streets that often do not provide sufficient bicycle infrastructure, and result in higher levels of
Signals (#) n/a n/a bicycle/motor vehicle conflict.
Bike Way (#) varies varies
Average Daily Traffic n/a nfa
Year of ADT n/a
Throughway YfN Y Y
Describe Proposed Solution: - Attach Sketch Map
TIns project will include improvements on bicycle boulevards and city bikeways, addressing
clear marking and wayfinding utilizing street siguage and pavement markings. The attached
map represents the proposed locations of improvements.


;repat;;J----#/~V Date: OTe Approval Dale: Program Year: Funding Amount:
r; ~tJJ rOcr 2009 $1,000.000.00
[5-2003) / _77 riA PROJECT PROSPECTUS
~I Part 1 Project Request (Page 2 of 2) Key Number: Jurisdiction:
16449 City Of Portland
Section: Portland Bikeway Signage and Striping I Region: Area: 1~~~~~2C
1 Portland Area
Project J'ustification
The selected City Bikeways and Local Service Bikeways have among the lowest traffic volumes and 85th percentile
speeds found on our proposed network. Improving these streets is consistent with City of Portland policy. The City's
Transportation System Plan defines local service bikeways as serving local circulation needs and providing access to
, adjacent properties and recommends improving. such bikeways via shared roadway treatments, traffic calming and
striping bicycle lanes. The proposed signage and striping is consistent with existing City policy. City Goal lIB
(Public Rights-of-Way) calls for providing planned bicycle facilities in conjunction with street improvements, or
developing convenient alternative access for bicycles on parallel streets.
)\dditional Information For Project R,equested By Local JUl7isdictions
Responsible Local Office To Be Contacted For The Following Activities:
1. Public Hearing I
Citizen Involvement Kyle Chisek (Office) 503-823-7041 (Phone)
2. Environmental I Planning Ryle CliiseK (Office) 50~-S~~-704~ (Phone)
3. Pre-Engineering Ryle CliiseK (Office) 50~-B~3-7041 (Phone)
This Official Request is From:
City of: Portland and/or County
By: MarkLear~L By:

By: By:
By:
Applicable Intergovernmental Agreements:
IGANumber: Jurisdiction Name: Agreement Date:
25,510




Adminisfr.ative Recommendation

(5-2003) (31 PROJECT PROSPECTUS
~. Part 2 Project Details (Page 1 of 2) Key Number: I,JUriSdiCtiOn:
16449 I City Of Portland
Section: Region: Area: District:
Portland Bikeway Signage and Striping 1 Portland Area 2N2B/2C
Enter: S-State C - Consultant A - Applicant E - Existing N - No
,A.cfivity RQ~PQnsibiHti~s Pennits and Clearances,
Surplus Property N Signs (Permanent) A Storm Sewer N Airport Clearance N Wetlands N
Citizen's Advisory Striping A Landscaping N land Use N Endangered N
A (Permanent) Actions/Permits Species
Photog rammetry N Project Sig ni ng A Irrigation N Flood Plain N Hazrnat N
Reconn ai ssa nee N N Building Historic A
Survey A Detour Borrow Source N Resource
Public Hearing Illumination N Material Source N Corps Engrs/DSL N DEQ Indirect N
N Remove/Fill Source Air
Field Survey RR Crossing N Disposal Source N Coast Guard N DEQ Non-Point N
A Source Water
Vicinity Map RR Protection N Local Agreement S,A Geology and Minerals N Archaeology N
A Survey
Soils/Geotech RR Separation N Sensitive Land .N Signals Warrants N Noise Study N
Investigation N
Hydraulic Study RR Encroachment N Value Engineering N Utilities A Seclion4(F) N
N (see below)
Utility Coordination N Utility Verify Vert Horiz A
(WH)
Right.Of -Way list of Utilities:
BES, Water, PGEfPPL, Qwest, LVL3
Right-Of-Way liaison N/A Access Control (YIN) N Curr Propsd
Acquisitions Relocat1ons
Simple No. Complex No. Business No. ReSidential No.
0 0 0 0 Design Standards Design Speeds Exception (YIN)
ASHTO varies N
Sugges_te.d Base.Design
Item New Work Surface (in) Over Existing Surface Item New Work Over Existing Surface
(in) Surface (in) (in)
n/a n/a n/a pavement markings - signage n/a nfa


structures
Structures length Width Height Cost Structure Length Width Height Cost
n/a






Approved Area Manager Date
xQ~LJ~ ~/81C:P1 (S·2003)

PROJECT PROSPECTUS

Part 2 - Project Details (Page 2 of 2)

Key No.: 1"6449

I Jurisdiction:

City of Portland

SECTION:

Portland Bikeway Sign age and Striping

I Region: Area:

1 Portland Area

I

Segment of Alternative 1:

No changes to the existing

Comments on Segment or Alternative:

Existing (below)

Units In: Feet Comment on Existing:

BIlSe sioe- curo parK[ng 1:SI1OUJder Lane Lane Lane IMedlan Lane Lane Lane l:snoUJder J-'arKln-g cure :Slde- IjIKe
Path Walk Type Bikelane 3 2 1 1 2 3 Bikelane Type Walk Path


Proposed (above) Units In: Feet Comment on Proposed: No changes to the existing
, -- - ~ I Segment or Alternative 2:

Comments on Segment or Alternatlve:

Existing (below)

Units In: Feet Comment on Existing: Testing second alternative

IjIKe srce- curo t'arKmg ::;nOUider • Lane Lane Lane IMeOlan Lane Lane Lane7- Shoulder ParKin.g Curb Side- tllKe
Path Walk Type Bikelane 3 2 1 1 . 2 3 Bikelane Type Walk Path


Proposed (above) Units In: Feet Comment on Proposed:
- ]
Segment or Alternative 3: ~ Comments on Segment or Alternative:

Existing (below)

Un1ts In:

Comment on Existing:

Bike Side- Curb Parking Shoulder Lane Lane Lane Median Lane Lana Lane snoucer ParKing Curb Side- Bike
Path Walk Type Bikelane 3 2 1 1 2 3 Bikelane Type Walk Path


Proposed (above) Units In: Comment on Proposed:
- - Segment or Alternative 4:

Comments on Segment or Alternative:

Existing (below)

Units In:

comment on Existing:

Bike Side- Curb Parking IShoulder Lane Lane Lane Median Lane Lane Lane snouicer parking Curb Side- Bike
Path Walk Type Bikelane 3 2 1 1 2 3 BIKELANE Type Walk Path


Proposed (Above) Units In: Comment on Proposed: (5-2003)

PROJECT PROSPECTUS

Part 3 Project Environmental Classification

Project Classification DClass I DEIS FEIS

DClass 2 Categorical Exclusion [8]Programmatic Categ, Exclusion DClass 3 EA Revised EA

Key Number: Jurisdiction:
16449 City of Portland
Project Name: Bridge No.: County: Region: Area: District:
Bicycle Boulevard Striping and Signage Multnomah 1 Portland! 2N2B12C
Area 1) Provide a brief description of the Project

Portland's bicycle boulevards and local city bikeways currently lack sufficient wayfinding to direct bicycle users to lower volume streets. Without the wayfmding, bicyclists use major streets that often do not provide sufficient bicycle infrastructure, and result in higher levels of bicycle/motor vehicle conflict. This project will provide clear marking and wayfinding utilizing street signage and pavement markings on bicycle boulevards and city bikeways.

USGS Quad Name, Township, Range, Section:

Portland and Mount Tabor quads

2) Estimated Right-of-Way Impacts (Including Easements, Number of Parcels, Acreage, and Improvements)

The project will attach signage to existing sign posts and provide pavement markings on existing road surface. No Right-Of-Way impact is anticipated,

3) Estimated Traffic Volume, Flow Pattern and Safety Impacts (Including Construction Impacts, Detours, etc.)

The project will have minor traffic impacts during the construction phase when the pavement marking treatment is applied and cured. Safety will be enhanced after construction by increased awareness of multi-modal transportation users sharing the same facilities.

4) Estimated Land Use and Socioeconomic Impact (Including Consistency with Comprehensive Plan)

As the project is attaching signage and making pavement markings on existing facilities there is no land use impact expected. The socioeconomic impact will be increased saftey and comfort for alternative modes of transportation.

5) Estimated Wetlands, Waterways and Water Quality Impacts

The project consists of pavement markings and attaching signage to existing sign posts. There will be no impact to water quality, wetlands or waterways.

6) Estimated Biological & Threatened & Endangered Species Impacts:

The scope of the project is such that there will are no anticipated impacts to biological resources or threatened and endangered species,

7) Estimated Archaeology and Historical Impacts

As the project is utilizing existing sign posts for attaching signage, there will be no ground disturbances and no anticipated archaeological or historical impacts.

8) Estimated Park, Visual Impacts and 4(f) Potential

The project area and scope will not impact parks, the visual landscape or 4(f) resources.

9) Estimated Air, Noise and Energy Impacts

There will be minor noise and air impacts during the construction period for applying pavement markings. As no major construction is occuring, these impacts will be limited. There will be no negative longterrn air, noise, or energy impacts due to this project. This project encourages alternative transportation usage and has the potential to positively impact air, noise, and energy.

10) Estimated Hazardous Materials Impacts

Prospectus Part 3-Local Jurlsdlctlou.dot Last Updated July 19, 2006

10[4

Project utilizes existing sign posts to attach signage and uses standard thermoplastic application for pavement markings. No hazardous materials impacts are expected.

11) Preliminary Identification of Potential Areas of Critical Concern and Controversial Issues

As the project is simply attaching signage to existing sign posts and providing pavement markings, no areas of critical concern are anticipated.

12) Documentation Requirements Section 106 clearance

ESA clearance

Limited Levell Hazmat survey

13) Estimated Pre-Construction Activity Impacts (drilling, survey work, etc

Prior to applying the pavement markings or attaching the signage, the City will identify specific locations for appropriate markings or signage.

14) Preliminary Identification of Publici Stakeholder Concerns

Public may not understand what the markings intend to designate. Project will include outreach to neighborhood groups to educate public on the nature of the pavement markings.

Prospectus Part 3-Local Jurisdiction.dot Last Updated July 19,2006 2 of 4

Env-Cat Exclusions

A "Categorical Exclusion" (Class 2) is a category of actions which does not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect (40 CFR 1508.4, 23 CFR 771.115).

The NEPA context of "significant" is defined at 40 CFR 1508.27 in order to determine whether a U.S. DOT project is excluded from preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (E1S).

Please answer the following questions:

Categorical Exclusions

23 CFR 771.117(a) - Would the project involve any of the following effects:

y N U N/A 1. Induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for an area?
() @' 0 C
Y N U N/A 2. Require relocation of significant numbers of people?
r & 0 c
y N U N/A 3. Have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resources?
c t!, 0 (")
y N U N/A 4. Involve significant air, noise, or water quality impacts?
c ~ n c
y N U N/A 5. Have significant impacts on travel patterns?
c. (;. o C 23 CFR 771.117(b)- Would the project involve unusual circumstances such as:

y N U N/A 1. Significant environmental impacts?
n @l o o
y N U N/A 2. Substantial controversy on environmental grounds?
n (iJ o 0
y N U N/A 3. Significant impacts to properties protected by Section 4(f) of the DOT Act or Section 106 of the National
r, C!, 0 C". Historic Preservation Act?
y N U N/A 4. Inconsistencies with any federal, state, or local law, requirements or administrative determination relating to the
0 ~, n 0 environmental aspects of the project? If you answered "YES" to one or more of the above questions, you likely DO NOT have a Class II project. If you answered "UNKNOWN" to one or more of the above questions, you MAY NOT have a Class II project.

In either of these cases, you should discuss the NEPA classification with an Environmental Manager, the REC

Program Coordinator, the NEPA Program Coordinator, and/or the FHW A Environmental Coordinator prior to classifying the project of the Prospectus Part 3.

If you answered "NO" to ALL of the above questions, the project is likely a Class II Action.*

Prospectus Part 3-Local Jurisdlction.dot Last Updated July 19, 2006

30f4

Type of Categorical Exclusions:

Y N U N/A A. Is the proposed action specifically listed under 23 CFR 771.117 (c)?
(i- r r c If "YES" please identify what:3. Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities.
AND/OR 8. Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals,
and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption will occur.
Installation of signs, pavement markings and bicycle facilities are specifically listed under 23 CFR
771.117 (c), 3.
Y N U N/A B. Is the proposed action specifically listed under 23 eFR 771.117 (d)?
c: (i (' c: If "YES" please identify what:
are not specifically listed under section (d). "While Class 2 actions do not require preparation of an EA or ElS, they may yet require additional environmental analysis of impacts to the natural and built environment.

Some 23 CFR 771.17 (d) list Class II actions may require a NEPA type process to facilitate coordination with regulatory agencies and stakeholder involvement.

o6ertwlf~

Rev ised: 5106/09

FHWA or State Official Approval:

~~ "''13 -

Phone Number:

Prepared By: Kyle Chisek

Date:.04-09-2009

Date: O~ .. )Qi

Prospectus Part 3-Local Jurisdiction.dot Last Updated July .19,2006

40f4

C) e

._

"'C C :s

LL.

t/) :s

:s

E

...

'II
I r.
~~
.. -
r 1
.: l,---r.
-{'-
" 1 "J
r. -, ,
/
\ I ',. / /' f
'. {; ~~k~_
1 I J
1
~ f