Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mayor Piercy noted her ex parte contact that occurred at the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) <br />meeting on July 10, 2008, during which a presentation on the bridge project was made by staff of the <br />Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). She summarized what was presented by ODOT and said <br />that citizens were given an opportunity to view the broadcast. Councilor Zelenka, who was also at the MPC <br />meeting, declared the same ex parte contact. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy determined there was no one present who wished to rebut the information provided by ODOT. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman averred that while technically the council was being asked to approve fill inside the <br />greenway, it was also being asked to approve the project as described in terms of scope, cost, and capacity. <br />While she acknowledged there were no local funds involved, the council was “enabling” the State and <br />federal government in constructing a bridge she maintained was larger and more expensive than would be <br />needed for many years and which might never be used to full capacity because that capacity was predicated <br />on widening I-5, which might not occur given the expense and lack of funding sources. The funding for the <br />bridge, while not local, was still taxpayer money, and would be tied up in a bridge and not available for <br />other projects on the State or federal system. She objected to that as being inefficient and wasteful given the <br />needs that existed. For that reason, she would oppose the motion. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman recalled that Springfield Mayor Sid Leiken had indicated at the MPC meeting that he had <br />an ex parte contact with Representative Peter DeFazio about the potential of adding ramps serving Franklin <br />Boulevard to the bridge. The staff notes indicated that ramps could be accommodated, and she asked if <br />there had been public discussion about that. Heather O’Donnell, associate planner, said that because staff <br />hadn’t actually reviewed a design, she had been unable to respond to the question about ramps at the Joint <br />Elected Officials meeting because there was nothing in the record in that regard. The applicant indicated <br />they were only adjusting the existing ramps to make sure the new alignment would work. She indicated there <br />was a comment in the applicant’s materials in the packet, which stated that it will be able to accommodate <br />future ramps but that there’s no further information about that. <br />Councilor Bettman said that the addition of ramps represented a “huge change” in the scope of the project. <br />She asked if the council was “de facto” approving that by its approval of the motion. She questioned <br />whether such ramps would require additional piers and river crossings. Councilor Bettman maintained that <br />the issue of such ramps was “put to bed” during her first United Front trip, and expressed surprise that <br />Mayor Leiken had been having high level discussions about it when the community did not know about it <br />and such ramps would change the assumptions related to the bridge project. Ms. O’Donnell said that <br />ODOT stated in its materials that the revision of the alignment of the ramps to meet the new bridges would <br />not prohibit additional ramps that would be part of a different, future project. Councilor Bettman asked if <br />that would cost additional money beyond that proposed. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked for a legal opinion as to whether council approval of the amendment conveyed any <br />approval related to future ramps. City Attorney Jerome said no. She said the council was not being asked <br />to approve any particular design through its approval of the Goal 15 exception. Councilor Bettman asked <br />who approved the design. City Attorney Jerome did not know, noting that discussion of the bridge design <br />was next on the agenda. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked if the council could condition its decision on future council approval of the <br />proposed design to ensure they were not approving ramps, and that decision would have to be brought back <br />to council. City Attorney Jerome did not think so. She believed this was the council’s sole decision point. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 28, 2008 Page 10 <br /> Meeting <br />