My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Ordinance No. 20258
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Ordinances
>
2002 No. 20242-20273
>
Ordinance No. 20258
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 4:43:58 PM
Creation date
7/21/2005 3:58:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Recorder
CMO_Document_Type
Ordinances
Document_Date
7/8/2002
Document_Number
20258
Author
James D. Torrey
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
262
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
WEST EUC~ PAP,~^y J~OD~FIED PROJECT'CONSISTENCY W~TH THE STA~,~ m ~ ........................... <br /> ..... ~ r~r~ ~ mu ~u~P~JRTATIOfl ~NNJNG RULE <br /> <br /> The Southern and Southern (Modified) Alternatives would result in significant adverse impacts to <br /> threatened and endangered species. While the Southern Alternative would not displace any T&E <br /> species, it would be located within 50 meters of over 235 Kincaid's Lupine plants. High-speed traffic <br /> along the facility would pose a substantial threat to the federally proposed endangered Fender's blue <br /> butterfly, 'which is attracted to the Lupine as a host plant for the butterfly larvae. The Southern <br /> (Modified) Alternative would displace 19 plants of Willamette Daisy and 12 clumps of' White-topped <br /> Aster. <br /> <br /> Because o~er alternatives have significantly reduced potential adverse impacts to T&E species in <br /> comparison to the Southern alternatives, the Southern Alternative and Southern (Modified) <br /> Alternative are not reasonable alternatives. The protection of T&E species is a paramount <br /> consideration, as reflected both by the applicable federal and state endangered species legislation and <br /> by the decision to reconsider alternatives to the Approved Design that would reduce overall adverse <br /> environmental ~mpacts. Where other alternatives are available with significantly less adverse impacts <br /> to T&E species, these alternatives become unreasonable. <br /> The Southern alternatives also are not reasonable because of the substantial damage they would do to <br /> the implementation and ~ntegrity of the ~Zest Eugene Wetlands Pla~ and to developing industrial <br /> businesses ~n the affected area, and because of their very high and continually growing costs. Placing <br /> these impacts in perspective requires some background discussion of the <br /> <br /> The YP~est Eugene Wetlands Plan was developed following discovery and ~nventory of a concentration <br /> of wetlands [n western Eugene ~n the late 1980s. Those wetlands coincided wkh areas that had been <br /> designated by the C~ty of Eugene and acknowledged by LCDC fbr industrial development. At the <br /> time of the wetlands discovery, industrial ~nvestment and development already was proceeding. By <br /> then, the City already had expended over $ t 2,000,000 in ~nfrastrncture to the West Eugene area to <br /> support such development. Private investment included over $900,000 by Spectra Physics for wetland <br /> mitigation to develop ks industrial property in th~s areafi5 It became clear to the affected <br /> governments, regulatory agencies and property owners that the conflicts needed to be addressed in a <br /> comprehensive and timely manner to achieve certainty in the planning process, protect wetlands, and <br /> to provide greater security for the City and developers in making investment decisions. <br /> <br /> The result was a study culminating w~th the adoption of the ~E~p in 1992. Today, the <br /> provides the basts for wetlands management in the West Eugene area. The plan was developed to <br /> balance the City's acknowledged need for economic development wkh the protection and restoration <br /> of a wetland and waterway system, as well as to protect natural diversity. The plan includes goals and <br /> policies for protection, enhancement, mkigation and development. <br /> <br />The WEW'P identifies approximately 1,307 acres of wetlands in the West Eugene area. Through the <br />coordination efforts between the C~ty of Eugene, Lane County, LCOG and affected state and federal <br />agencies, 1,109 of these acres have been designated for protection or restoration, while 288 wetland <br />acres remain available for development. The 1,307 acres include about 600 acres ink,ally designated <br />for industrial use, of which 485 acres now are identified for protection or restoration. <br /> <br />Over $7 m[ll~on of federal funding has been ~nvested in the implementation of the WEWP to datefie <br />In addkion to the federal funding, there has been considerable investment from private property <br />owners located in the area west of Bekline Highway, north of West 1 l th Avenue, and south of the <br /> <br />~5 See The ~a~ure Conservancy Report No 2 (September/October ~lgg3). The Spectra Physics $~e is now occupied by PSC <br />Scanning. <br />~6 On August 2~, 1999, dudng a tour of~e West Eugene wetlands area hosted by LCOG, Senator Gordon Srn~th pledged an <br />add~iona! $2,5 mflfion ~nves~ent to knp[emer~ the ~WP. Also, the federa~ Environmental Pro~ection Agency contributed <br />$50,~ to th~ deVeloPment of the ~WP to use il as a nationa~ case study in how wefJand protection and economic <br />development both can be accommodated ~n an urban environment. <br /> <br />E~IBIT 0,-'1 - FINDINGS 38 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.