CC Minutes - 06/18/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that any transportation-related facility that places fill within the setbacks must take a goal exception before that fill can occur. He added it also states that in the Willamette Greenway in the setback, if a proposed non-water related non-water dependent use is to be placed within the greenway setback, the goal exception is required. He noted the Metro Plan also requires that all three jurisdictions participate in any goal exception that is not related to an urban growth boundary amendment. Mott explained the area of the exception is the ODOT right of way as it crosses the Willamette River. He noted the City of Springfield did not have a greenway setback prior to the application of ODOT to go forward with the project. He said their planning commission met on May 20 to establish a setback line. He noted their planning commission had also heard a request for a discretionary approval for an intensification of use within the greenway setback area. He explained the planning commission's decision was contingent upon the elected officials' approving the exception. Mott noted the joint planning commissions met on June 3 to consider the findings and the request for the goal exception of the Metro Plan amendment. He explained that the June 6 memorandum (copy in file) on the last page, summarizes the conclusion of the planning commission. It forwards recommendations to the elected officials approving the goal exception and the plan amendment subject to three changes. He noted one change included boater safety on the canoe canal and the Willamette River during construction. He stated a request was made that the elected officials consider the implication of a specific clause in the Metro Plan tax amendment as an ordinance, (attachment 6) the text language proposed includes a clause that addresses future capacity or safety improvements for the portion of I-5 right-of-way over the Willamette River. He said it was the feeling of members of all three planning commissions that the distinction should be made regarding the extent of the future action. He stated they requested the elected officials consider that clause to amend it, delete it, or leave it as is. He added they did not forward any alternative language. He recalled there were six people who testified at the joint planning commission hearing and the testimony was summarized in the staff report (copy in file.) He passed out a map describing where the right-of-way was in relation to the roadway. (Copy in file.) He noted the proposed routing of the detour bridge is within the ODOT right-of- way and there is a support structure that requires fill and the fill is outside of ODOT's property, but the roadway surface is itself within the greenway. He noted language had been proposed by the planning commission on a condition that calls for a construction, mitigation and restoration plan. He reported people were in agreement with the specifics of those three plans. Pape asked if they made their decision subject to approval that ODOT consider in their plans for the new bridge, a three lane bridge on both sides and an onramp north out of Glenwood from Franklin Boulevard and an off-ramp south onto Franklin Boulevard into Eugene. Mott responded they could include any condition that everyone agrees with. He said they didn't prepare any findings that would support that. He added the findings they prepared addressed the impacts of the detour bridge within the greenway setback. He noted there would be a NEPA Page 2 - Joint BCC/Springfield and Eugene City Council Public Hearing - June 18, 2003 WD bc/m/03060/T