Presentation on theme: "1 C E T A S Range of Alternatives Presentation Date Project Name Project location (city, county) ODOT Key Number:"— Presentation transcript:
1 C E T A S Range of Alternatives Presentation Date Project Name Project location (city, county) ODOT Key Number:
2 Project Team (limit to persons in attendance - list name, title, affiliation) ODOT Lead Local Jurisdiction point of contact Other present team members
3 Project Vicinity Include a vicinity map here (Oregon Map with a Star on it, or a Regional map with a star on it) Label nearest city or community Label County and Highway names as appropriate
4 Area Context and Features Include a Project Area map here (with API outlined) and briefly describe the area (major geographic features, land use, land owners, etc.) The m ap should show relevant natural and historic resource features Briefly review the transportation problem
5 Purpose and Need Adopted Purpose Statement (in full) indicate when CETAS concurred with Purpose and Need Need (Summarize in bullets) –Safety –Congestion –Capacity –Connectivity –Failing bridge, etc.
6 Goals and Objectives Goals and Objectives (Summarize in bullets)
7 Schedule EA/DEIS – anticipated completion date REA/FEIS – anticipated completion date Right of way acquisition – ant. Comp. date Permits/Approvals - anticipated completion date Construction- anticipated completion date
8 Project Status ( Provide a brief update of work accomplished since your last CETAS presentation ) Public involvement Early agency coordination/Site visits Decision-making committee meetings Environmental Work
9 Alternatives Recommended for Further Study Alt A Alt B Alt C Simply list them here and provide a very brief description of each one with the aid of a map. Explain that you will go over these in detail later, but are providing them now for context. Defer detailed questions for later in the discussion.
10 Screening Criteria Does the alternative meet Purpose and Need? Does the alternative address public concerns contained in the Goals and Objectives? Briefly describe the process and players the team utilized to ensure a context sensitive solution from the community’s perspective. Is the alternative informed by resource information gathered through reconnaissance efforts? Briefly describe the process, information sources, field work, and methodologies used during the environmental reconnaissance effort
11 Alternatives Considered But Not Recommended for Further Study Alt A –Reasons not recommended (based on screening criteria) –Impacts to natural and cultural resources relative to alternatives advanced for recommendation. Alt B –Reasons not recommended (based on screening criteria) –Impacts to natural and cultural resources relative to alternatives advanced for recommendation. Alt C… These may be individually listed, or discussed in sets of alternatives that do not meet one aspect of the screening criteria. This discussion should be accompanied by maps showing known resources and general footprints of the alternatives recommended and the alternatives not recommended for further study. A key concern of the CETAS committee is apparent practical alternatives with less environmental impacts that are not being recommended for further study.
12 Alternatives Recommended for Further Study Alternative 1: No Build benefits impacts Why Recommended Alternative 2: Name benefits impacts Why Recommended Alternative 3: etc. This discussion should be accompanied by maps (rollouts on the wall, handouts, or inserted into the power point presentation)
13 Alternatives Recommended for Further Study cont. When discussing the impacts of each alternative, the following information should be disclosed as appropriate: Potentially impacted wetlands and type & quality of those wetlands Potentially affected historic resources that need to be evaluated for eligibility Presence of ESA species and critical habitat Floodplain/floodways in the API Potential Fish passage issues Section 4(f) and 6(f)(3) resources identified that may be directly impacted Potential need for goal exception (alternatives that require a goal exception should not be advanced if reasonable alternatives that do not require the exception exist). Mitigation Strategies (conceptual approaches only at this point) Stormwater treatment strategies (conceptual)
14 CETAS issues and concerns After all questions have been answered the CETAS coordinator will request a round robin; “sound bites” from each CETAS member on concerns, indication of concurrence, and information they would like to see at the next presentation.
15 Follow up and Action Items Confirm next CETAS step(s)