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 EUGENE PARKWAY ~OD~F1ED PROJECT--CONSIS~NCy WiTH THE STATEW1DE PLANNING GOALS AND TRANSPORTAT~ PLANNING RULE <br /> <br /> Construction and occupancy of buildings in the Green Hill Technology Park has already begun. In <br /> 1998 and 1999, Rosen Products completed their first phase of development, and by September 1999 <br /> employed over 200 workersfi0 Based on a rough total build estimate by Russ Royer, Real Property <br /> Officer with the City of Eugene, total buildout of the park by the time of acquisition could add about <br /> $30 million to the costs in today's dollars. No similar cost increase would occur with either the <br /> Approved Design or the Modified Project because those affected areas are not identified for industrial <br /> development. Consideration of increased right-of-way costs over time is relevant and appropriate <br /> because the WEP will be constructed in phases and right-of-way for the area west of Beltline <br /> Highway may not be purchased for several years. Moreover, in an era where the need for <br /> transportation improvements is ever growing, but funding to pay for those improvements is <br /> constrained, spending many $1 Os of millions extra to locate a needed transportation facility across an <br /> established industrial park is not reasonable, particularly when the alternative requiring goal <br /> exceptions removes no land from the commercial agricultural base and has no adverse impacts on <br /> commercial agricultural enterprises. <br /> <br />There are also additional hidden costs. Development and implementation of the V/EV/? involved <br />substantial public and private expense, including significant funding flor planning. The I, FE[YP <br />resulted in the designation of the Green Hill Technology Park and surrounding areas for industrial <br />development. With the Southern alternatives, substantial additional public funds would need to be <br />spent to replan industrial development in this area. Besides being unreasonable in terms by <br />compromising the integrity of the IYEIt/p, the Southern alternatives also would be unreasonable by <br />requiring the City and affected agencies to expend public monies to start over in planning for <br />industrial development in this area and achieving new compromises with wetlands protection. <br /> <br />Taken cumulatively, alt of the above-described impacts support the conclusion that the Southern and <br />Southern Modified alternatives cannot reasonably accommodate the identified transportation need for <br />the ~p. <br /> <br /> Approved Design <br /> In 1986 Lane Count), adopted goal exceptions authorizing the Approved Design. The Approved <br /> Design was confirmed in the federal FEIS and is an element of both the City's and the County's <br /> acknowledged comprehensive plans. <br /> <br />Because the Approved Design does not require a new goal exception, it reasonably belongs in the <br />category of facilities addressed under OAR 660-012-0070(5). However, because (1) the principal <br />reason for rejecting the Approved Design is environmental, (2) there is value in comparing the <br />adverse environmental impacts of the Approved Design with the Modified Project, and (3) <br />environmental comparisons between alternatives are required under OAR 660-012-0070(7), this <br />alternative is analyzed in the section addressing alternatives requiring exceptions. That analysis is <br />incorporated herein by this reference, and for the reasons therein stated, this alternative cannot <br />reasonably accommodate the identified transportation need. <br /> <br />Green Hi~ F~yovor Alternative <br />The Green Hill Flyover Alternative, described in more detail below, was designed to move the <br />alignment north of the Central Oregon and Pacific railroad tracks west of Terry Street within the <br />UGB, then cross back to the area covered by the existing Approved Design goal exceptions west of <br />Green Hill Road. The intent was to develop an alternative that would avoid most of the natural <br />resource impacts of the Approved Design but not require new goal exceptions. Because the Green <br /> <br />60 The e×~sting infrastruc(ure and development ~ just phase 1 of the technology park. The same deve{oper owns ~ar)ds to the <br />north and wes~ ~haf[ are p~anned ~o be developed in la~er phases, <br /> <br />EXHiE)FF C~i - FiNDiNGS 40 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.