Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. O’Donnell indicated that she would find the answer to Commissioner Fleenor’s question and respond in writing. Mayor Leiken assumed that a demolition permit would be required to remove the temporary and current bridges. He asked if the two cities would be involved in the permitting process. Mr. Mott replied that they would not be involved in authorizing such a permit. Councilor Taylor said she was confused by the statement that the completed bridge would only have two lanes but would be wide enough for three lanes. She asked if that meant that the lanes would be extra wide. Ms. O’Donnell explained that the road would have extra wide shoulders. She added that she would include this in her written response. Commissioner Sorenson asked if the elected officials were approving the bridge or were they approving the use of the land within the greenway. Ms. O’Donnell reiterated that the proceeding was seeking approval for a text amendment to the Metro Plan and the refinement plan in order for the bridge to be considered. In response to a follow-up question from Commissioner Sorenson, Ms. O’Donnell repeated the information provided in the staff report regarding what other permits and processes the project would have to go through for the City of Eugene. She noted that ODOT would also have to acquire a flood plain development permit, only applicable to the portion that was outside of the ODOT right-of-way. Mr. Mott listed the permits that ODOT would need to apply for in the City of Springfield, which included a permit to develop within the greenway, a permit to develop within the flood plain, and, if there would be any kind of tree removal, a tree felling permit. He said the application of those permits applied within the boundary of Springfield. Commissioner Sorenson asked if the size of the bridge was relevant to the present decision. Ms. O’Donnell responded that the fact that the proposed bridge would be built within the existing ODOT right-of-way meant that it was not relevant to the present decision. She stated that if the bridge were designed to be built outside of the right-of-way, ODOT would have to provide more information and a detailed review of pier locations, vegetation removal, and so on. Commissioner Dwyer asked what permits would be required by the County. Stephanie Schultz, Planner for the Lane County Planning Department, replied that no permits would be required by the County; the County was only required to provide its approval for the amendment to the Metro Plan. Councilor Bettman averred that the findings indicated there would be no change in use but she thought the noise and fill levels were only related to the temporary bridge use. She found this illogical. She asserted that the new bridge was actually capacity enhancement and not a replacement project. She asked what an average lane width for an Interstate 5 lane was. Ms. O’Donnell replied that she did not know. Councilor Bettman asked what the bridge would cost in transit money. She wanted to know if the project was in the Regional Transportation Plan. She also asked if there was any local money from the cities or the County. Ms. O’Donnell said she would provide those answers in her written response. Commissioner Fleenor asked if the three-lane width would be in addition to an emergency pull-off. Ms. O’Donnell replied that she would include the answer in her written response. She noted that it was her understanding that striping the bridge for additional lanes was a project identified in the TransPlan but it was a separate project. She stressed that typical replacement projects did not appear in that plan. She explained that when the striping was proposed at some future point there would have to be another federal process that would include hearings. She thought the concerns related to additional traffic and noise would be addressed at that future point. MINUTES—Joint Elected Officials— June 24, 2008 Page 5 Lane Board of County Commissioners and Eugene and Springfield City Councils