Appendices
A. Federal Register Rules and NOtices for Listed Species and Critical Habitats within the Project Action Area
B. Correspondence
C. USFWS Jackson county species list
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Project Vicinity
Figure 1-2 No Build and Build Alternatives
Figure 2-1 Build ALternatives : Split Diamond and Directional Interchanges
Figure 2-2 Build Alternatives : Design Options
Figure 2-3 :Build Alternatives : Northern Alignment
Figure 2-4 : Action Area
Figure 3-1 : Existing Conditions
Figure 5-1 : Impacts : Split Diamond Interchange
Figure 5-2 : Impacts : Directional Interchange
Figure 5-3 : Impacts : Bypass : Design Options A, B and C
Figure 5-4 : Impacts : Bypass : JTA Phase Options A, B and C
Figure 5-5 : Impacts : Northern common Alingment
List of Tables
Table 1-1 : Project Summary
Table 1-2 : Species and Designated Critical Habitat (DCH) in this Consultation
Table 4-1: Relative Conservation Values for Vernal Pool Complexes within the Highway 62 Project Study Area
Table 5-1: Direct Impacts to Terrestrial Natural Resources within the Build Alternative
Option Footprints,Highway 62 Corridor Solutions Project
Table 5-2: Direct Impacts to Vernal Pools by Conservation Value
Table 5-3: Indirect Impacts to Vernal Pools by Conservation Value
Table 5-4: Mitigation Ratios as Listed in the Programmatic Biological Opinion (USFWS 2011)
Table 5-5: Mitigation Acres due to Direct and Indirect Impacts of the Project to Vernal Pool Complexes, Interchange and Common Northern Segment
Table 5-6: Mitigation Acres due to Direct and Indirect Impacts of the Project to Vernal Pool Complexes, Bypass Options
Table 5-7: Related Projects in the Rogue Valley MPO 2009-2034 RTP
Project Team Leader/District Manager Authorization of
Conservation and Mitigation Measures
I have reviewed the Highway 62 Corridor Solutions Project (KN 13226) project description for accuracy. I have also reviewed the conservation and mitigation measures for this project. I agree that the conservation and mitigation measures should be incorporated into this project's contract documents or implementation plans (in the case of use of in-house forces) so that ODOT will be in compliance with the Endangered Species Act and other applicable environmental laws and regulations.
Jim Collins, Geo/Environmental Manager Date
ODOT, Region 3
Anna Henson, Environmental Project Manager Date
ODOT, Region 3
Kimberly K. Degutis, Senior Ecologist Date
URS Corporation
1.0 Introduction
As a result of increasing traffic, congestion, and safety problems, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), the Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (RVMPO) Policy Committee and the City of Medford formed a Solutions Team to evaluate ways to improve transportation in the Highway 62 Corridor. The proposed Oregon Highway 62 Corridor Solutions Project (Project) is comprised of a 7.5-mile segment of Oregon Highway 62 (OR 62) that extends from Medford through White City, in Jackson County, Oregon. This segment of OR 62, from its southern terminus at the interchange with Interstate 5 (I-5) to its northern terminus at West Dutton Road in White City, is a major transportation corridor and has become heavily developed with commercial uses.
The Solutions Team has recommended the construction of a Bypass Alternative running generally parallel to OR 62 that will convey thru-traffic between I-5 and White City. Two Build Alternatives of the Project are currently being assessed in a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Additionally, three Design Options, common to both Build Alternatives, are under evaluation in the DEIS. Since a Preferred Alternative has not been forwarded at the time of this assessment, this Biological Assessment (BA) evaluates both Build Alternatives with all Design Options to account for all potential project impacts.
1.1 Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed action is to address current and future highway capacity needs, improve intersection operations and provide enhanced transportation safety and multimodal opportunities in the Highway 62 Corridor from I-5 in Medford north to West Dutton Road in White City. OR 62 serves an important role in the state’s transportation network; however, increasing traffic volumes are causing congestion and delays, and safety statistics show that some parts of OR 62 exceed statewide crash rates. In addition, there are limited provisions for multimodal operations on OR 62.
1.2 Project Background
OR 62 currently functions as a major interurban and interregional facility, connecting the City of Medford with rapidly-developing communities to the north. The corridor is also the primary route to regionally important recreation areas, including the Rogue River National Forest and Crater Lake National Park. Additionally, OR 62 provides access to one of few low-elevation passes crossing the cascades via Oregon Highway 140 (OR 140).
In 2007, the segment of OR 62 between the I-5 ramps had an average daily traffic (ADT) count of over 27,000 vehicles. As a point of reference, the section of I-5 at the North Medford Interchange had an ADT of approximately 24,500. In the next twenty years, traffic volumes on OR 62 are expected to increase to over 32,000 ADT, causing increased congestion and delays (ODOT 2009) . Congestion in the Highway 62 Corridor has caused lengthy delays that are now occurring more frequently and lasting for increasingly longer periods. That is, “rush hour” conditions are no longer limited to morning and evening commute periods; in some parts of the corridor, traffic congestion begins early and remains a problem throughout the day, until after the end of the evening commute.
High traffic volumes and congestion have led to higher crash rates. Crash rates on the section of OR 62 between OR 140 and Dutton Road exceeded the statewide rate for similar facilities four out of five years between 2002 and 2006. There were 606 reported crashes on OR 62 between I-5 and White City from the year 2002 through 2006. Safety concerns led to the initial Highway 62 Corridor Solutions project in 1997. Since that time, ODOT has reduced the speed limit and increased signage. Although those actions have helped to reduce crash rates, the Project detailed herein is a further step towards reducing crash rates, enhancing safety, and relieving current and projected congestion (ODOT 2009).
Existing provisions for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users on OR 62 are minimal. Much of the highway lacks sidewalks and safe pedestrian crossings. While there are some bicycle lanes and wide shoulders on OR 62, bicycling on OR 62 is neither safe nor pleasant. The Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) now operates two bus routes on portions of OR 62 during weekdays only.
Since 1990, population growth rates in both Jackson County and the City of Medford have exceeded the statewide average. According to official population forecasts, this trend is expected to continue at the same comparative rate until at least 2025, with much of that new growth occurring in the area north of Medford. Population growth has resulted in increased traffic volumes, particularly on OR 62. Traffic volumes will continue to increase as the area becomes more heavily populated; this will result in more congestion, longer delays, and greater safety problems.
The general framework for this assessment is to establish the existing environmental baseline for vegetative communities in which the Project is proposed. Once the baseline is established, this assessment will discuss how the proposed project activities – Build Alternatives, Design Options, and construction phasing segments – would affect the environmental baseline. Finally, this assessment will evaluate changes to the environmental baseline resulting from the proposed action and use that information to arrive at a determination of effect.
Factors considered in evaluating project impacts included the species’ dependence on specific habitat components that may be removed or modified, the abundance and distribution of habitat, habitat elements in the project vicinity, the possibility of direct impact to listed species, the degree of impact to habitat, and the potential to mitigate the adverse effects. Refer to Table 1-1 for a summary of this project:
Table 1-1: Project Summary
|
Project Name:
|
Highway 62 Corridor Solutions Project
|
ODOT KN:
|
KN13226
|
Federal Aid Number:
|
X-NH S022(022)
|
Location of Project:
|
Crater Lake Highway 62 – MP 0.45 to 8.2
|
Watershed and HUC Field (5th and 6th):
|
HUC# 1710030801 Bear Creek
HUC# 17100308 Middle Rogue River
HUC# 17100307 Upper Rogue River
HUC# 1710030708 Little Butte Creek
|
USGS Quadrangle Map Location:
|
Eagle Point 7.5-Minute Quad,: Township 38 South, Range 1 West, Sections 9 and 10
|
Size of Action Area:
|
5,004 Acres
|
City:
|
Medford to White City
|
County:
|
Jackson
|
Project Staff:
|
Brad Rawls and Kimberly Degutis, PWS
|
Site Visits:
|
Mason, Bruce and Girard (MB&G) (1999, 2000, 2004), URS Corporation (2010)
|
Site Access Permission:
|
Granted or not granted by landowner if footprint exceeds right-of-way (ROW)
|
Current Land Use(s):
|
Developed, agriculture, riparian forest, wetlands
|
Waterways on Site:
|
Bear Creek RM – 7.9
Lone Pine Creek RM – 1.3
Upton Creek RM - 3.3
Whetstone Creek RM – 4.6
Swanson Creek RM – 2.3
Jack Creek RM – 1.2
Unnamed Trib to Cable Reservoir RM – 0.1
Unnamed Trib to Little Butte Creek [1228407424553] RM – 0.8
Unnamed Trib to Little Butte Creek [1228592424544] RM – 1.5
|
Prior Correspondence:
|
6/16/1999 - Agency briefings and site visits between ODOT and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
6/7-7/2000 - Agency briefings and site visits between ODOT and Services.
10/4/2004 – Second agency scoping meeting.
5/3/2007 – Field meeting with Collaborative Environmental and Transportation Agreement for Streamlining (CETAS) members.
8/6/2010 – Follow-up meeting with David Leal (ODOT liaison to USFWS, ODOT and URS to discuss project changes since 2007.
10/7/2010 - Most recent meeting between ODOT, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and URS staff occurred on October 7, 2010 to discuss impacts to vernal pool complex (VPC) habitat and mitigation measures.
|
Share with your friends: |
