Ordinance No. 20234 Exhibit C - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

cable to the property upon which the project is expected to be located can only be devel- oped if it can be shown, by means of the exception process set forth in Goal 2, that the overall purpose of the statewide goals is better met by excepting the project from the ap- plicable goal. None of the projects in the revised TransPlan require additional analysis prior to TransPlan adoption under the exceptions requirements of Goal 2. As described in Chapter Three of the revised TransPlan, the transportation needs analysis required under the Transportation Planning Rule resulted in the Capital Investment Ac- tions project lists in that chapter. The projects listed in the Capital Investment Actions project lists are the product of an analysis of current and future transportation needs and are based in part on the list of projects established in the previously acknowledged Trans- Plan. Those acknowledged projects continue to address the area's transportation needs and remain in the revised TransPlan. Some of the projects listed in Table la and Table Ib in Chapter 3 of the TransPlan are previously acknowledged projects that address future transportation needs. The projects in Table la'remain on the list of20-year capital proj- ects because they have not yet been developed but they remain consistent with, and the best means of addressing, the transportation needs for the Eugene-Springfield area identi- fied in the revised TransPlan. The projects i'ncluded on the Financially Constrained 20- Year Capital Investment Actions project lists (Tables la, 2, 3a) establish a network of fa- cilities that meet overall transportation needs for the 20-year planning period. The proj- ects included in the revised TransPlan as a part of the future projects lists (Tables Ib, 3b) are also included because they will meet the area's transportation needs for the period be- yond the initial 20 year planning period. The Transportation Planning Rule and other administrative rules applying the statewide goals allow the development of transportation projects on several types of property that are designated for other uses. Table la of the revised TransPlan contains the financially constrained list of roadway capital investments that will be needed in the Eugene- t J.' . Springfield metropolitan area over the next twenty years. Some are located completely within the corporate limits of either Eugene or. Springfield. Others are located in the un- incorporated area betWeen the corporate limits and the urban growth boundary (UGB). In several instances the project follows along or outside of the UGB. Most projects that are adjacent to, or cross, the UGB are permitted on rural lands by OAR 660-012-0065. Some projects that are not scheduled for development within the projected period of the current TransPlan, which generally includes projects listed in Chapter 3: Table 1 b, may not yet be sufficiently planned to determine whether they require an exception at this time. In all cases where a project's plans are sufficiently developed to analyze, projects fit within the authorization of the Transportation Planning Rule. Roadway improvement projects 60 (Jasper Road), 98 (Thurston Road), 454 (Greenhill Road, Barger to West 11 th), 527 (Hunsaker LaneIBeaver Street), 533 (Irvington Drive), 635 (Delta Highway, Greenacre's to Ayres), and 654 (Game Farm Road North) are coter- minous with some portion of the UGB. In each'instance these are existing two-lane roads without bike lanes and sidewalks, with inadequate provisions for cyclists and people on Exhibit C Findings in Support of the Adoption of TransPlan 8