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