Laserfiche WebLink
WEST E Y ~F~ED PROJECT--CONSISTENCy ~ THE ~TAT~, ................... <br /> ~ v ~, ~mu~: ~m~r~ ~; AND TP~NSPORTAT~O~ PLANNING RULE <br /> <br /> proceeding westward next to and parallel with the railroad tracks past Green Hill Road (the UGB) and <br /> Goble Lane to its intersection with Highway 126 and its terminus east of Richmond Street (see Figure <br /> <br /> Inside the urban growth boundary, existing land uses westward from Beltline Highway along the <br /> Modified Project alignment consist almost exclusively of vacant and open space lands. SDEI& Figure <br /> 3-3. While these properties are designated mostly for industrial use, with a small amount of low <br /> density residential (see SDEIS, Figure 3-4), they are not expected to develop for these purposes. <br /> Instead, under the City's acknowledged plan, the WEP is the intended land use in this area. Where the <br /> Modified Project leaves the Approved Design to cross the railroad tracks, it enters an area where <br /> wetland protection is the predominant use. See WEW?, Map 3. To accommodate the Modified <br /> Project, the WEWP will need to be amended to reflect the shig in the alignment. <br /> <br /> Outside the urban growth boundary, existing land uses within the project area include wetland <br /> mitigation, hobby farms, four commercial farms, and some rural residences. See Figure 2; see also <br /> SDFJS, Figure 3-3 and Compatibility Memorandum, Figure 1. The West Eugene Wetlands Study <br /> Area extends approximately 0.g mile west of Green Hill Road in the project area. Also, an urban <br /> reserve area extends into this area approximately 0.7 mile from the UGB at Green Hill Road. Lands <br /> immediately affected by the Modified Project are designated predominantly for agricultural use, with <br /> a small amount of forest land present. See SD£IS, Figure 3-4 <br /> <br /> A detailed description of land uses in the project area, including a discussion of existing uses by <br /> ownership, the location of commercial agricultural enterprises, and a discussion of accepted fhrming <br /> practices, appears in the Compatibility Memorandum, incorporated herein by reference.28 <br /> <br /> Overview of Exceptions Process <br /> LCDC adopted the Transportation Planning Rule in 1991 to implement Goal 12, Transportation~ <br /> OAR 660~012~0065 of that rule identifies uses which are permitted on rural lands wkhout taking <br /> exceptions to Goals 3, 4, 11~ or 14. Because the Modified Project would be a "new road" ora type not <br /> otherwise permitted under OAR 660-012~0065, Lane County must take goal exceptions to Goals 3, 4, <br /> I l, and 14 pursuant to OAR 660-012-0070. <br /> <br /> Under OAR 660-012-0070 in particular, and under ORS 197.732(1Xc), Goal 2 Part II and OAR 660, <br /> Division 4 more generally, an exception must provide reasons justifying (1) why the state policy <br /> embodied in the applicable goals should not apply, and (2) why areas not requiring a new exception <br /> cannot reasonably accommodate the use. For transportation facilities, these requirements are spelled <br /> out in greater detail in OAR 660-012-0070(3) through (6), set out below~ <br /> <br />In adthtmn to addressing "need" and alternat~ves~ an exception also must (3) compare of economic, <br />social, environmental and energy consequences of the proposed location and other alternative <br />locations requk/ng exceptions, determining whether the net adverse impacts associated with the <br />proposed exception site are significantly more adverse than the net impacts from other locations <br />requiring exceptions; and (4) describe the adverse effects the proposal is likely to have on adjacent <br />uses and explain how the proposal will be rendered compatible with adjacent land uses. <br /> <br />For transportation facilities, the identification of the "transportation need" and the evaluation of <br />alternatives ave key components of the exceptions process. OAR 660-012-0070(4) requires the <br />exception to demonstrate the existence of a "transportation need" identified consistent w~th the <br />requirements of 660-012-0030. Further, OAR 660-012-0070(4) and (5) require the exception to <br />demonstrate that the identified transportation need cannot reasonably be accommodated at non- <br /> <br />28 See a~so Land Use Technical Repo~ <br /> <br />EXHIBFF C4 - F~NDINGS 18 <br /> <br /> <br />