Ordinance No. 20258 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ST E~NE PARJG~Ay ~DiFIED PROJECT--CONSISTENCY ~TH THE STAT~'~mr~ ~ ................. ....... r~*u~mr~ ~ AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE OAR OAR 660-012-0070(2) provides that where exceptions to Goals 3, 4, 11 or 14 are required, "the exception shall be token pursuant to ORS 197.732(1~c), Goal 2, OAR 660, D~v~s~on 4 ~d hh~s d~vision/~ Because OAR 660, D~v~sions 4 and 12 ~mplement Goal 2 and ORS 197.732(1)(c), a demons~afion of compliance with these administrative rule requirements demons~ates compliance wkh all of these review s~nd~ds.30 Th~s technical memorandum provides the findings of fact and m~ons demons~ating ~mpl~ance wkh the applicable exception s~ndards, ~s required by Goat 2 ~d ORS 197.732. OAR OAR 660-012-0070(3) requires that "an exception adopted ~ p~ of a TSP or refinement pl~ shall, at a m~nimum, decide ne~, mode, function and general locmion for the propos~ healthy or ~mprovement. As note~ above, ff~e West Eugene Parkway project is already an element of the TransPlan and the e Coun~ R~oI Comprehe~ive plam3~ ~e ac~owledged 1986 exception ~deafifi~ the need for project32 and detemined ~ts mode (h~ghway), function (l[mit~ access major ~edal) and general location ~is cu~ent exception ~s required only to change the general l~afioa of the approved hc~lky from south of the m~lroad ~acks to nomh grease trac~. F~gure 1 Shows ~e co~dor wkh~n which ~e Modified Project would be lommd. The Modified Project would have ~bur 12-foot w~de ~avel lanes w~ 8~foot wide shouldem on the ou~[de of the Ianes. A center median would v~, in w~dth from 12 to 14 feet. See Roadway Profiles at F~gure 2-3 of tbe SDEZS. The alignment shi~ no~hward from the Approved Design would be accomplished w~ a grade-sep~ated crossing over the Central Oregon ~d Pacific m~lroad tracks and the Amain Channel near Te~ S~eet. The precise l~fion of the hc~l~W wkh~n the co~dor w~ll be detemined during prQect design. Becau~ the hcil~W ~s a state highway, ~ts design and cons~ucfion w~ll comply wkh es~bl[shed ODOT s~nd~ds for ~nsmcfing urban, s~tew~de limked ac~s facilk~es, ~d w~ 1~1 s~ndards and pr~edures when appl~mble. OAR 660,0i2-0070{4), ORS igL732{i}{c)(A), Goal 2 Part ll(c){i), OAR 660-004. 0020(2)(a) and OAR OAR 660-012-0070(4) states: "To address Goal 2, Part II(c)(1) the exception shall demonstrate that there is a transportation need identified consistent with the requirements of 660-012-0030 which cannot reasonably be accommodated through one or a combination of the following measures not requiring an exception: "(a) Alternative modes of transportation. 30 The ~anguage in ORS 197~732(1)(c) is identical to the Goa~ 2 exception language set out above in the analysis of compliance w~th statewide p~anning goal 2. 31 Beceuse the TransP~a~ was adopted pdor to LCDC adoption of the Transportation Planning Ru~e, ~t ~s nat a TSP as that term is used Jn the mia. The Large Counci~ of Governments is currently developing a regional TSP to comply with TPR require~nts. ~rding to City of Eugene Planning Director Jan Childs, that p~an currently ~s scheduled for headngs in the of 1999, with adoption unlikely pdor to June 32 The 1986 exception k~ent!fies this prole~ as needed to provide a safe transition to Highway ~26 and to avok~ the existing na~ow, ~rved ore.ass at ~e Southern Pac~c [now Central Oregon and Pac~c] railroad tracks. Add~ional need for this project is described below. E)CqIBiT C~i - FiNDiNGS 2~