HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence ODOT 2/1/2008
\'.
, ~.
,I'
.. ,~/~ .J,
~
'JU'O-' ir; fi'U i~nrM-'f7'
= lha '"'" [I \:' (c, " '
--~.._-..-- ~.,'
FEB - 1 2008 ",~i
oregon bridge delivery partners"
-,-~"-,._,_..._--,-~
february I, 2008
Cily Of Eo,:'"'
PI3lillif1f:;uivl:,I,m
Heather O'Donnell
Planning and Development Department
City of Eugene
99 West 10th Avenue
Eugene, OR 97401
Re: 1-5 Willamette Bridge Project
The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) would like to request the City of
Eugene Council to initiate review of Type I Metro Plan Amendments as the lead body for
this proposal, which requires approval by the City of Eugene, City of Springfield, and
Lane County,
ODOT is requesting amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan for the proposed
replacement of the Interstate 5 (1-5) Bridges over the Willamette River and Canoe Canal
(also known as Patterson Slough), The project proposes to construct replacement of the 1-
5 bridges and remove the original and detour 1-5 crossings over the Willamette River and
Canoe Canal, ODOT is requesting the following plan amendment approvals:
,
· An amendment to the Metro Plan, in the form of an exception as required by
Metro Plan, Chapter III, Section 0, Policy II, to authorize the placement of fill
within the Willamette River Greenway setback requirements associated with the
"new bridge, In addition, Policy II exceptions may be needed to place fill in the
Willamette River Greenway associated with (I) removal of the decommissioned
1-5 Willamette River and Canoe Canal bridges, and (2) construction of temporary
work bridges to remove the decommissioned bridge and detour bridge currently in
use, and (3) construct new bridges.
· An amendment to the Metro Plan, in the form of a goal exception to Statewide
Planning Goal 15 (Willamette RIver Greenway), to authorize a nonwater-
dependent and nonwater-related use within the established Willamette River
Greenway setback, Although the project is exempt from Goal 15 because 1-5 is an
existing urban use, ODOT requests this exception as a precautionary measure.
· An amendment to the Willakenzie Area Plan to allow structures and fill
associated with the replacement 1-5 bridges to be constructed within the first 35
feet back from the top of the Willamette River streambank within the Willamette
River Greenway in the Willakenzie area, This amendment only requires approval
ofthe Eugene City Council.
"
,
,
,\,
.
oregon bridge delivery partners
1165 Union Street NE Salem, OR 97301
Page 1015
\,
't
\
.'
"
The enclosed Metro Plan Amendment Application is broadly divided into two chapters,
Chapter One covering Project Description and Chapter Two covering Legal Findings,
Chapter One provides a detailed description of the proposed project and includes the
following topics:
I, I Background Information
1,2 Project Description
1.3 Temporary Construction Facilities
t.4 Duration and Sequence of Construction
1.5 Budget and Funding Sources
1,6 Proposed Mitigation Measures
1,7 Public Involvement Efforts
Chapter Two presents the legal findings pertaining to the requested plan amendments and
addresses the following topics:
2,1 Requested Plan Amendments
2,2 Application Review Procedures and Standards
2.3 Requirements for Exceptions under Statewide Planning Goal 15 (Willamette
River Greenway) and Metro Plan Chapter III, Section D, Policy II
2.4 Compliance with OAR 660, Division 4 Exception Requirements
2.5 Amendment to Willakenzie Area Plan
2.6 Compliance with Statewide Planning Goals
2,7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan, Willakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront
Park Study, Laurel Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance Beautification
Study
2.8 Compliance with Eugene Code (EC) 9.7730(3)(a) and (b), EC 9.8424(1)(b)
and (c), and EC 9.8424(2)
2.9 Other Information
This amendment application has been revised to address Completeness Review
comments received from the City of Eugene, The comments received and a summary of
the responses and location of responses are included in Table I,
Please contact me at (503) 423-3785 or corrinne.humphrey@hdrinc.com if additional
information is needed to consider this request.
Sincerely,
'~
-1
Corrinne Humphrey, AICP
Oregon Bridge Delivery Partners
1001 SW 5th Avenue I Suite 1800 I Portland, OR 97204
ph: 503.423.3785 I fax 503,423.3737 '
email: corrinne.humohrevfalhdrinc.com
Date Receiveq
FEB 0 1 2008
Planner: BJ
oregon bridge delivery partners
1165 Union Street NESalem, OR 97301
Page 2 of5
:.
Table 1: Completeness Review Reqnests and,Responses
Comment
Overall, the application materials are high quality and
appear to be fairly complete, although we were
somewhat surprised at the lack of specific details such as
Milepoints and Bridge numbers/structural details, We
were also surprised to see the current ADT of 49,000
since ODOT's 2005 traffic volume tables listed ADT at
milepost 193.44 (0,5) miles south ofl-I05 at 59,000
ADT. There is also no mention of the railroad that must
be spanned by the bridges which will involve several
additional pennits,
The proposed text amendments to the Metro Plan on
page 32 of the written statement indicates that a new
subsection D is being inserted, but there is no reference
to the page number or the section being modified,
Also, as an informational item,' footnote 21 notes "which
includes a bridge over 1,5, when it should state an 1-5
bridge over the WiIlamette River, 1-5 is also incorrectly
shown as \,5, The text reads one dash five instead of
eye dash five - it is a typo,
Please complete the application fonns for the Metro
Plan and Refinement Plan Amendments,
For clarification, please add the City limits and urban
growth boundary to Figures 2, 4, and 5,
It is noted that no bridge designs are included, It is
understood that ODOT is involved in an on-going public
effort regarding the bridge design so there is not final
design at this time, However, given the nature of the
project, staff recommends that the applicant provide
some conceptual schematics of the site plan and
elevations (even if there are a couple ofaltemative
designs), The written statement could include several
qualifications regarding the conceptual nature of the
design and the on'going public review process, as stated
on page 3 of the written statement.
Please revise the written statement to include the code
citations ofEC 97730(3)(a) and (3)(b), Metro Plan
approval criteria, at the beginning of each appropriate
section.
oregon bridge delivery partners
The application forms have been completed and are
, included in this resubmittal package,
The City limits have been added to Figure 2,
Figure 4 was replaced with a figure that better
illustrates pier locations and conceptual bridge designs,
All figures are within'the UGB,
Figure 4 was replaced with a figure that better
illustrates pier locations and conceptual bridge designs,
Text regarding conceptual designs and the public
process has been added under subsection OAR 660,
004,0022 Reasons Necessary to Justify an Exception
Under Goal 2, Part lI(c) of Section 2.4 Compliance
with OAR 660, Division 4 Exception Requirements
and under Policy 4 in the Transportation Element of
subsection c, Willakenzie Area Plan of Section 2,7
Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan, Willakenzie
Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel Hill Plan,
South Hills Study, and Entrance Beautification Study,
Code citations ofEC 97730(3)(a) and (3)(b), Criteria
for Approval of Plan Amendment, have been added
under Section 2,2 Applicable Review Procedures and
Standards and Section 2,8 Compli~e~l~ ~5~e _ _ c.. rl
Code (EC) 9.7730(3)(a) and (b). E~A
"
Response
Design details are not yet available as the design is a
preliminary stage, ODOT is in the process ofhiring a
contractor for engineering design, Available structural
details have been added to Section 1.2 Project
Description, The 49,000 ADT is consistent with the
project Environmental Assessment and has been
confinned,
Additional information regarding the replacement
bridges spanning the UPRR tracks has also been added
to Section 1.2 Project Description and to subsection d,
Relationship with Other Projects of Section 2,9 Other
Information,
Reference to the page number and section for the
WiIlakenzie Area Plan amendment has been added to
the text in Section 2.5 Amendments to Willakenzie
Area Plan,
Amendment language and location for Metro Plan
Policy D,]] has also been added under Policy D,II in
the Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and
Waterways Element of subsection a, Metro Plan of
Section 2,7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan,
Willakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance
Beautification Study,
Text has been revised per suggestion in what is now
Footnote 23 in Section 2.5 Amendments to Willakenzie
Area Plan. "1-5" has been revised to "1-5" as necessary
throughout the document.
1165 Union Street NE Salem, OR 97301
FEB 0 1 200~age 3 of 5
Current Page
Number
Pages 3 to 5
Pages 4 and 68
Page 36
Pages 49 and
50
Page 37
N/A
Page 6
Pages 9 and I 0
Pages 9 and 10
Page 26 and
60
Pages 17 and
66
Planner: BJ
.'
Please revise the written statement to include the code
citations of EC 9.8424(1) through (2), refinement plan
approval criteria.
Please address criterion EC 9.8424(2).
Please confirm that the permanent piers and temporary
pilings for the permanent and temporary bridges are not
included in the fill calculations provided on page 4, and,
it appears that the number of piers will be 8?
J don't see any mention of any project #'s in TransPlan
or the RTP that correspond to this work [fsuch a
connection is not required (are bridge bundles exempt?)
then a simple sentence in response would probably do.
It's my understanding that if federal $$ are spent or will
be spent on the project it must be in the RTP; the EA
public hearings are set for January 31,2008 in Eugene
and Springfield, so federal money has already been
spent
On page 53 in the subsection Relationship to Other
Projects there is no mention of the railroad; they've
unofficially stated plans to add a parallel track so
vertical clearance for this future facility should be
mentioned.
Please address all the Statewide Planning Goals, not as
footnotes, and if they are not applicable please indicate
why.
Regarding Goal 15 exception (page 27-29), OAR 660-
004-0020(2)(b)(A) states that "the exception shall
indicate on a map or otherwise describe the location of
possible alternative areas... II The written statement
(page 29, last paragraph) wouldn't require an exception.
Please provide a map showing those locations or further
describe where those alternative locations are.
Regarding Goal 12 (page 40), please list and clearly
provide a finding for each subsection (a) through (c) or
OAR 660-012-0060(1) to clarify that there is no
significant effect under any of these.
Regarding the Metro Plan, please address the following
Specific E1ementPolicies: D.9, E.2, and F.34. Some of
the policies you may be able to refer to other areas in the
written statement where the issue was already addressed.
Regarding Metro Plan policy D.II, please provide
language to amend D.II to reflect the proposed project
oregon bridge delivery partners
Text has been added to Section 1.2 Project Description
clarifying the fill quantity estimates presented in Table
2. These calculations are for the fill placement and
removal associated with the roadway section in the
Willamette River Greenway between the Canoe Canal
and the Willamette River, and do not include
excavation or fill placement associated with the bridge
piers. The number of I?iers (8) has also been confirmed.
The TransPlan and RTP projects that correspond to this
project have been added under subsection TransPlan
and Regional Transportation Plan (R TP) of Section 2.1
Requested Plan Amendments.
Text regarding the railroad has been added to Section
1.2 Project Description and the Relationship with Other
Projects subsection of Section 2.9 Other [nformation.
All Statewide Planning Goals previously unaddressed
in the text have been added to Section 2.6 Compliance
with Statewide Plannin,. Goals.
The alternative bridge alignment locations have been
described in subsection OAR 660-004-0020 Goal 2,
Part lI( c), Exception Requirements of Section 24
Compliance with OAR 660, Division4 Exception
Requirements.
Pages 35, 66,
and 67
Pages 66 and
67
Pages 4 and 5
Page 16
Pages 4 and 68
Pages 38, 39,
43, and 47
Page 33
Afinding for each subsection (a) through (c) or OAR
660-012-0060(1) has been added to subsection OAR
660-012-0060(1) Plan and Land Use Regulation
Amendments of Goal 12 of Section 2.6 Compliance
with Statewide Planning Goals.
The Metro Plan Specific Element Policies: D.9, E.2,
and F.34 have been addressed in subsection a. Metro
Plan of Section 2.7 Compliance with Metro Plan,
TransPlan, WiIlakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park
Study, Laurel Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and
Entrance Beautification Study. . .
Amendment language and location for ~tAn Rp~
1165 Union Street NE Salem, OR 97301
FEB 01_4015
Pages 45 and
46
Pages 49, 50,
51, and 55
Plctrlner: BJ
Table 1: Completeness Review Requests and Responses
Policy D.II has also been added in this section.
The Willakenzie Area Plan Policies: P.3 (page 15), P4
(page 98), P.8 (page 100), and P.2 (page 155) have
been added to subsection c. WiIlakenzie Area Plan of
Section 2.7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan,
Willakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance
Beautification Study.
Additional text'regarding aesthetics has been added to
Policy 4 in this subsection.
Relevant EBS policies have been addressed in
subsection g. Entrance Beautification Study of Section
2.7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan,
Willakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance
Beautification Study.
HDR verified that the permanent project improvements
are not located in' theRPS area; however, portions of
temporary work bridges may be. Relevant RPS polices
have therefore been addressed in subsection d.
Riverfront Park Study of Section 2.7 Compliance with
Metro Plan., TransPlan, Willakenzie Area Plan,
Riverfront Park Study, Laurel Hill Plan, South Hills
Study, and Entrance Beautification Study
Regarding the Willakenzie Area Plan, please address the
following Policies: P.3 (page 15), P4 (page 98), P.8
(page 100), and P.2 (page 155). Some of the policies you
may be able to refer to other areas in the written
statement where the issue was already addressed.
Regarding Policy 4 (page 98) and Policy 4 (page 15
which you already addressed), I have attached portions
ofthe City of Eugene Entrance Beautification Study
(EBS). The EBS also includes general policies
(attached) that may be applicable. Please address. I've
attached the twoEBS routes (B-1. and B-2) that may not
be applicable but please confirm.
Attached is a partial copy of the Riverfront Park Study
(refinement plan) study area boundary, showing the
eastern portion oHhe study area which abuts 1-5. The
figure on page 5 of the written statement shows the
proposed project boundary as being within the RPS
boundary. However, it appears per the figures on pages
6, 8 and 9, that no work is proposed within the RPS
boundary. Please confirm (assuming it's not, then the
RPS policies don't need to be addressed).
The project area south of the Willamette River appears
to be in both the Laurel Hill Plan and South Hills Study
(refinement plans). Regarding the Laurel Hill Plan,
please address Policy 6 (page 3, attached) ifapplicable.
Regarding the South Hills Study, please confirm if any
portion south of I 8th Avenue is at or above 500 feet in
elevation, and if so, please confirm the highest elevation
and address the policy regarding on-site and off-site
impacts if conditions I through 5 exist as stated in the
SHS (page 5 of Exhibit A attached here) if applicable.
Regarding the Metro Plan and Willakenzie Area Plan
policies addressing protection of natural resources)
please provide a more detailed discussion about how the
proposal will reduce impacts rather than only citing that
future permitting processes will address natural resource
impacts through conditions.
As an informational item, regarding the Goal 15
exception (page 21), the findings for OAR 660-004-
0022(6)(a) do not discuss how the proposed project will
affect or reduce impacts than the existing on the scenic
qualities and views as a greenway value.
oregon bridge delivery partners
The appropriate Laurel Hill Plan polices have been
included under subsection e. Laurel Hill Plan of
Section 2.7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan,
WiIlakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance
Beautification Study.
Although it has been determined that none of the
project area south of 18th A venue is at or above 500
feet, South Hills Study conditions I through 5 have
been included under subsection f. South Hills Study of
Section 2.7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan,
WiIlakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance
Beautification Study.
A more detailed discussion regarding natural resource
impact minimization has been included under relevant
Metro Plan and Willakenzie Area Plan policies in the
subsections a. Metro Plan and c. Willakenzie Area Plan
of Section 2.7 Compliance with Metro Plan, TransPlan,
Willakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hills Study, and Entrance
Beautification Study.
Additional language, including a discussion about how
the project will affect or reduce impacts on existing
scenic qualities and views, has been added to
subsection OAR 660-004-0022 Reasons Necessary to
Justify an Exception Under Goal 2, Part lI(c) of
Section 2.4 Compliance with OAR 660, Division 4
Exception Requirements.
50
Pages 59, 60,
and 61
Page 60
Page 65 and
66
Pages 63 and
64
Pages 64 and
65
Page 65
Pages 50, 51,
and 62
Page 26
- 1
UCue HeCe ved
O Page5015
FEB 1 Z008
1165 Union Street NE Salem, OR 97301
t-'Ianner: BJ
METRO PLAN AMENDMENT ApPLICATION
Chapter 1: Project Description
1.1 Background Information
The purpose of the proposed project is to replace the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge in the
Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan Area (Figure I). The existing bridge was
decommissioned in 2004 after the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) found
substantial structural problems, I including cracks in the supporting structures. Built in
1962, the existing bridge was designed using bridge standards that are no longer
sufficient for the size of modem freight trucks. Replacement of the 1-5 Willamette River
Bridge is needed to meet state and federal safety and mobility policies.
This bridge replacement qualifies for funding from the Federal Highway Bridge
Replacement and Rehabilitation Funding Program and is a key project of the Oregon
Transportation Investment Act. A temporary detour bridge was built adjacent to the
decommissioned bridge in 2004 and now handles all traffic.2 The detour structure does
not meet current seismic standards and the construction methods used to build the
structure only met environmental requirements as they applied to temporary, not
permanent, structures. A permanent replacement for the decommissioned bridge is
necessary to improve safety and ensure mobility of all users of 1-5 in the
Eugene/Springfield area.
1-5 is a major transportation artery and the only freeway that traverses the entire length of
the west coast from Mexico to Canada. Regional economies depend on the reliable use of
it in the Eugene/Springfield area. The current average daily traffic (ADT) for the 1-5
WiIlamette River bridge is approximately 49,000 vehicles; ODOT predicts the use of this
interstate facility to increase to approximately 73,000 ADT by 2030 (20-year design).
The ultimate goal of this project is to replace the decommissioned bridge and substandard
detour bridge with a permanent bridge to provide capacity to accommodate current and
future traffic volumes.
If the decommissioned bridge is not replaced with a permanent bridge that meets current
safety and design standards, the temporary detour bridge would likely have to be
upgraded to handle increasing traffic volumes and address safety concerns.
I The inspection resulted in a sufficiency rating of 20 on a 100 point scale. A bridge qualifies for
replacement funding from the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Funding Program
if it has a sufficiency rating under 50.
2 The detour bridge is located entirely within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Springfield. In
2003, Lane County and the cities of Springfield and Eugene approved a Metro Plan amendment and an
exception to Statewide Planning Goal 15 (WiIlamette River Greenway) authorizing construction of the
temporary detour bridge and its removal following completion of the permane~e.ficelllf"\t..!1r.il!i\E1\ TPtid
exception was adopted to Metro Plan text, Policy No. 13, Chapter Ill, Section D.~tneL~:ti'
Plan Amendment Request
2/0 I /2008
FEB 0 1 2008
I
Planner: BJ
J
.
Prqect Location
Unn Co.
.,-?-
. -..-::
~~
4 Zr
I},~
0': ," 4.." .~
~~ .~~
. .... 1}'
. - -.,.
__...... _.. .wI
. - ~ ~ );'':--''
oJ .. ~
~ ~
~.-, L j ...~ ~ I'
~. ~- .' /~. a4"" ~ r;
'~ ./ ..._~
~ ;
.' ,; I
. ~
~ r::
(Or~
I.
~
..
.....
~ ~ ~
~
.~
,
~
--
'" Highways
/'../ Major toads
CJ County boundary
tIP Cities
....., VVater body .a
Sreams ..,
o Q$ 1 2 3 4
'!vl"""'k'<<.,.
-
(f,) aa
1-5 WiL
I<'lgunl
"ieinit\' !\lnp
.. Rin'r Hl'id~r PrQied . I
~"""~.........
Date Received
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 Z008 2
e1anneI:..BJ
1.2 Project Description
The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project proposes to remove and replace both the
decommissioned bridge and the temporary detour bridge across the Willamette River,
Franklin Boulevard, and 1he Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks with two new parallel
bridges (one southbound and one northbound) (Figure 2). In addition, the existing bridges
across the Canoe Canal would be removed and replaced with new bridges. Proposed
construc1ion would include; construction and later removal of one or more temporary
work bridges; demolition of the decommissioned Willamette River Bridge, Canoe Canal
Bridge, and detour bridges; construction of replacement bridges; reconstruction of the
roadway approaches to the bridges (1-5 and ramps); rehabilitation of1he project area, and
completion of any required mitigation of project impacts.
At this phase, ODOT has developed conceptual schematics illustrating the new 1-5
bridges, but has not developed detailed engineering design plans. These planning-level
bridge design plans are included as part of Figure 4, which also shows two options for
pier localion. This information is being used by ODOT and the Federal Highway
Administration (FHW A) during environmental analysis and public. involvement; the
documentation that is required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
ODOT seeks to maintain flexibility of design related to bridge form, materials, and
aesthetic treatments 1hroughout the planning process, which will provide the engineers
with flexibility to balance economic cons1raints and community requirements into the
bridge design. Design elements described in this application are based on conceptual plan
development to address current site constraints, environmental conditions, and the
requirements of NEP A; therefore, information on bridge design presented in this
application should be considered preliminary and is subject to change during the final
bridge design process. Although there are several possible bridge designs, all would be
wi1hin essentially the same footprint and will require Metro Plan amendments for
placement of bridge piers and fill within the greenway area.
The new crossing will be composed of two bridges over the Willamette River: one
dedicated to carrying northbound traffic and the other carrying southbound traffic (Figure
3). The new bridges would be constructed in about the same location as the
decommissioned and detour bridges, but would require minor shifts of alignment, as well
as adjustment of the connections to 1-5 of the Franklin Boulevard ramps to meet the
necessary raising of 1-5 by about ten feet (compared to the decommissioned bridge)
where the bridge crosses Franklin Boulevard. The new bridges would be designed with
. enough width to eventually carry up to six lanes of traffic to meet the 20-year design for
future traffic needs; however, additional travel lanes are not proposed as part of this
project and the new bridge would be striped to match the existing travel lanes at both the
north and south ends (i.e., two lanes in each direction). The width of the proposed new
Willamette River Bridges would be 64 feet "curb-to-curb" for each direction (northbound
and southbound) with the total width of each bridge being about 68 feet. These bridges
would be about 1800 feet long. Likewise, exis1ing 1-5 crossing of the Canoe Canal north
of the Willamette River will also be replaced by a pair of new bridges, which would each
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
3
Planner: BJ
be about 200 feet long. Though there would be a slight shift in the alignment of 1-5, all
improvements would remain within the existing ODOT right-of-way.
For the purpose of this application, the new bridges over the Willamette River and the
Canoe Canal will be considered the same facility. These bridges would meet current
safety and design standards for a1l1ravel needs typical on this section of 1-5. Traffic
volumes would not change as a result of the proposed bridge replacement. No additional
lanes, channelization changes, or speed zone changes are planned, although the new
bridges would be designed to accommodate future traffic needs.
The new bridges would be cons1ructed in the same general loca1ion as the extstmg
bridges and, based on the current concepts, would not require any permanent right-of-
way acquisition from Alton Baker Park. The new bridge location would require some
minor shifts of alignment, as well as reconnection of portions of the Franklin Boulevard
northbound and southbound on/off ramps to Franklin Boulevard. The new bridges would
be higher than the decommissioned bridge to provide more clearance over Franklin
Boulevard, which would provide flexibility to local jurisdictions for future improvements
to the Franklin Boulevard corridor, as well as meet current vertical clearance
requirements for state highways. Although there are no spe'citic plans for future'
improvements to Franklin Boulevard, the proposed clearances would allow the addition
of turning or through lanes, sidewalks or bicycle/pedestrian paths, transi1lanes, aesthetic
treatments, or other improvemen1s. The bridges over the UPRR would be long enough to
allow the addition of a third track.
There would be placement of new fill and removal of existing fill within the greenway
associa1ed with the new 1-5 Willamette River bridges. Placemenl and removal of fill
would be associated with the roadway section between the Canoe Canal bridges and the
bridges that cross the Willamette River. When the detour bridges were constructed, a
temporary easement from the Willamalane Park and Recreation District was acquired by
ODOT for placement of fill associated with the roadway section between the Canoe
Canal and the Willamette River. A condition of that easement is that fill placed within i1
for the detour bridge be removed when the permanent replacement bridge is constructed.
All fill would be placed within ODOT right-of-way. Some existing fill, both within the
ODOT right-of-way and within a temporary slope easemen1 east of 1-5, would be
removed, resulting in a net reduction of fill. Table 2 provides an estimate of the fill
placement and removal based on the conceptual designs presented in Figure 4. Fill
quantity estimates presented in Table I are for the fill placement and removal associated
wi1h the roadway section in the Willamette River Greenway between the Canoe Canal
and the Willamette River, and do not include excavation or fill placement associated with
the bridge piers (piers are discussed in the following paragraphs).
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
Planner: BJ
4
Table 2. Estimates of fill placement and removal in cubic yards in the Willamette River Greenway based
o~ conceptual desiens
CIty
Location
Eugene
North of Canoe Canal
Between Canoe Canal and WiIlamette River
Springfield
North of Canoe Canal
Between Canoe Canal and WiIlamette River
Total
Added
Fill (yd3)
Removed
Fill (yd3)
Net (yd3)
5,000
21,000
o
o
5,000
21,000
1,000
3,000
30,000
15,000
46,000
61,000
-14,000
-43,000
-31,000
Approximately 30,000 cubic yards of fill would be placed on the north side of the
Willamette River to modify the roadbed approach to the new bridges. There would be
approximately 61,000 cubic yards offill removed from the approach to the detour bridge,
resulting in a net decrease of 31,000 cubic yards of fill in the WiIlamette River
Greenway. Fill on the south side of the Willamette River would be minimal as this bridge
section would be supported entirely on piers. Fill amounts associated with temporary
work bridges would be negligible because the temporary structures will likely be built on
driven piles and connected to designated staging areas.
Both pier configuration options (Figure 4) propose 4 piers each for the north bound and
south bound bridges, for a total of 8 piers within the Willamette River Greenway. Each of
the northbound and southbound piers would be side by side. The estimated size of each
pier foundation is 63 feet by 30 feet; the piers for the through arch bridge would be
approximately 12 feet wider (i.e., 75 feet by 30 feet) because the structural components
of the bridges would be on the outside of the travel lanes. Both pier configuration options
would have one set of piers located in the middle of the Willamette River, one set of piers
on the north bank, one set of piers on or near the south bank, and one set of piers south of
Franklin Boulevard outside the WiIlamette River Greenway. The project would result in a
reduction of piers from the existing five piers for the decommissioned bridge and six
piers for the detour bridge currently in the Willamette River. The Canoe Canal would be
spanned completely and these bridges will be perched on fill associated with the roadway
previously described.
Plan Amendment Request
2/0 1/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
5
Planner: BJ
Ci
l
15!~ ~
,:ell
~ ~ ~
,I
~1
I: '-I
"~
,...~
e. ,
"
~
~
...;)j"e"
"~
~ . "'lJ"!,,~
~ !;j ."
..... ~.. ~~:, ......, ~
" - ~'.;.
~
,
I
[
"
. J
99 \...
.'.
,1:1 ::
~' '.
,p
'"
..
$
..
I:l!
;.;;.j
I."!
i.~
'" ~.-';.
~
.
R '"'
:1
, -
,;,
~~1, . ,~.
..." 'J..
..'4'+"~.rr'
" .
\i! '-, "
.!~.:
..
.....1"
'''"
..
~
~
p
'~ ~
I!)
. Parks
r~J Willamette River Greenway
(fl Eugene Crty Limits
Q Springfield City Limits
CJ Project area
All Highways
/'../ Major roads a
o 280 560 8401.t'lO ~
,~
,
..
~
..
::;(~ ,
ts-.
. {oJi.. ~
. r-
lII;" -
<Zl'k,'. ~U""'HIlIAnta~.".
.:iIJ.. ._,~... .~'" ~ .
eo
"
.
"
,~
I
'.1t;!,~(n-~'U
-
C!? .c:!IIA.
~l.COOOI5..._ISII'I
Flgutl' 2
Project Area
1-5 "llb"""tt_ Rh-_r Bride_ P,'oj_ct
Plan Amendment Request
2/0 1/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
6
'"
Planner: BJ
@ Rebuilt road'wvays
~ Replacement bridges
/'V Potential wall locations
/'V Toes to slope
.. INillamette River Greenway
o 130_460~,._9
""'P"" "Oi.,
-
r.=-. .....
.~/~
Flgurt' 3
Location of Pmpooed R<placem<nt Briu~..
1-5 "lIlamelto Rh'or Brideo Projoct ,
"""'lCOOOOS...............
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
7
Planner: BJ
..
1.3 Temporary Construction Facilities
As with any significant bridge construction, the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project will
require temporary construction facilities, including staging areas and temporary work
bridges. The specific operations in regard to temporary construction facilities will be
determined by the contractor selected by OOOT to construct the project. Requirements
and restrictions will be placed on their operations to minimize environmental impacts,
meet regulatory requirements, and meet commitments made during the public
involvement process. These measures will be defined during the NEPA process and may
include keeping bicycle/pedestrian paths open and safe, noise restrictions, or work hour
limits. Staging areas and haul roads would be designated by OOOT for the contractor.
For the purpose of this application, OOOT assumes that two areas would be required for
construction and demolition, one on each side of the river, and haul routes to these
staging areas will be available (Figure 5), The currently-proposed staging areas would be
located on OOOT right-of-way (Figure 5), but would also require the temporary
occupancy of three parcels not currently owned by OOOT, including portions of Alton
Baker Park, within the greenway, adjacent to \-5. OOOT would acquire temporary
easements for use of non-OOOT property durjng construction. Figure 5 shows very
conservative estimates of the maximum areas that may potentially be needed for staging.
Actual areas are likely to be less than shown in Figure 5.
The northern staging area would likely be located partially withjn Alton Baker Park. This
site would be accessed via Walnut Street, now a bicycle/pedestrian path. This is the same
route that was used for access during construction of the detour bridge. The southern
staging area would be located jn a clearing adjacent to the trail east of the detour bridge.
Franklin Boulevard will be used for access to the southern staging area, The proposed
staging areas would occupy approximately five acres within the Willamette River
Greenway.
Temporary work bridges would be constructed to facilitate the construction of the new
bridges and the demolitjon of the old bridges. The work bridges would likely use driven
piles to create a stable and temporary work platform across the river. The use of this
technique will not require any significant till to construct the work bridges. The two work
bridges, including all pilings, would be removed after the project js complete, and the
staging areas would be restored to original conditions prior to construction. The use of
temporary construction facilities is a necessary part of the proposed project and OOOT
will implement mitigation and conservation measures developed during the
environmental permitting process to limit these temporary impacts.
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
8
Planner: BJ
1u~/"~r
Pier Confiauration ODtions
.*,
/
--------
~
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Box GiRDeR BRIDGE
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
9
Planner: BJ
(/~
-
. '"
.
-
DECK ARCH BRIDGE
l
THROUGH ARCH BRIDGE TYPE
Figure 4: Pier Location Options and Conceptual Bridge Designs
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
PlannenoBJ
"'~. .,
'r, ~:~:! .~ '~."
. 4l>'....,~,
~~ r-
<
,
<11
'.~
~~,
,~
.~i;
, ~.
4'(~
f~"
~
...., ....- "
;.~..
.j
. ....... ",',.
1I
..
~Bike;;p.~J
l . .
.. '"
. f
.
.
"
~
Q Staging areas
~ Vvll1amette River Greenway
· Parka 9
Rlgtrt-ol'-YAy
/'\../ fUghkl4'.W.y En-n
o 1~ 150 m 300
~~
-
(f)m8.
\
P"'''~d'''';"'''''~d.;::~:.\\,'r..::. Received
Plan Amendment Request
2/0 1/2008
FEB 0 1 2008
II
Planner: BJ
1.4 Duration and Sequence of Construction
Construction of the project would take up to four years. As planned, construction would
begin as early as 2009 and continue through 2012. Demolition of the existing bridges and
construction of the new facilities would require three summers of in-water work which is
only allowed from June I to September 30. The actual sequence of construction has not
been determined, but a likely sequence would be:
. Remove decommissioned bridges and construct temporary work bridge
. Construct new southbound bridges and connecting roadway
. Temporarily put both directions ofl-5 traffic on the new southbound bridges
. Remove the detour bridges and construct temporary work bridge
. Construct the new northbound bridges and connecting roadway
. Remove work bridge and restore the project area
. Inspection and monitoring done throughout construction.
Traffic would be maintained on 1-5, Franklin Boulevard, the railroad, and the
bicycle/pedestrian paths throughout construction. Some short term road closures may be
required, but these would be limited to a few hours. It may be necessary to close portions
of the bicycle/pedestrian paths for longer periods (i.e., up to several days). A continuous
route across ODOT right-of-way for the bicycle/pedestrian pathways would be
maintained on both the north side and the south side of river during construction.
1.5 Budget and Funding Sources
The 1-5 WiIlamette River Bridge Project is part of the Oregon Transportation Investment
Act (OTIA) III State Bridge Delivery Program, which involves the repair and
replacement of more than 300 bridges statewide over a 10 year period. The 1-5
Willamette River Bridge project is the largest in the $ 1.3 billion OTIA III program,
The project is funded at $180 million, which includes preliminary engineering and
design, right-of-way acquisition (if needed), demolition, road work, structures, ties to the
existing transportation system, and all construction and inspection. Of the overall budget,
approximately $70 million is designated just for the bridge structures crossing the river,
railroad, and Franklin Boulevard, and Canoe Canal. This includes approximately $10
million earmarked for additional bridge aesthetics. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, a federal transportation
funding package, will provide $30 million for this project supplementing the $150
million from state sources.
The OTIA III program emphasizes using local subcontractors and material supplier;
therefore, a substantial portion of the project cost is expected to be spent in the
Eugene/Springfield area over a four year period.
Plan Amendment Request
'2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 ~~08
Planner: BJ
1.6 Proposed Mitigation Measures
ODOT seeks to preserve scenic, aesthetic, historic, and environmental resources
throughout the proposed project. The NEPA environmental document will identify
proposed measures that avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate environmental impacts; these
measures will be finalized based on public and agency comments as part of the
environmental process. The final bridge design will incorporate input from the local
community and comply with all pertinent environmental regulations. Construction
activities will follow the best management practices designed to minimize impacts to
resources. Such practices include, but are not limited to, dust, noise, and erosion control.
To avoid, minimize, and/or mitigate the impacts of this project, ODOT proposes the
following general measures, among others:
· Meet OTIA 111 Environmental Performance Standards in order to meet the
requirements of the programmatic environmental permits that apply to the
statewide bridge program. These performance standards define the level of effect
that a project may have upon the environffient, thereby limiting or avoiding
impacts to the environment, through the use of proper planning, design, and
construction activities,
. Continue public involvement through design and construction
· Plan traffic management to keep all travel modes open and safe during
construction
. Limit work hours
. Restore/enhance affected areas
. Limit project noise
Specific mitigation measures in addition to those listed above will be determined during
the final design and NEP A processes.
1. 7 Public Involvement Efforts
ODOT recognizes the need for citizen participation in all phases of this project; therefore,
ODOT initiated a public outreach and involvement program that includes a variety of
outreach methods including public meetings, open houses, newsletters, project website,
and local agency consultation. In addition, an II-member Community Advisory Group
(CAG), composed of representatives of key community organizations and neighborhood
groups, has provided input on the purpose and need, goals and objectives, environmental
issues, bridge type, design features, and other project planning issues. Organizations
represented on the CAG are:
o Citizen Planning Committee for the Whilamut Natural Area
· Willamalane Park and Recreation District
o Eugene Parks and Open Space Division
. Laurel Hill Valley Citizens Association
o Fairmount Neighbors
'." 'i Harlow Neighbors
... ';~",:"
Date Received
FEB 0 r 2008
'.
. ~t ..
:;',Plail Amendment Request
2/0112008
':',i.-!
Planne~?' BJ
\, . '.r" '
. Glenwood Neighborhood Group
. Springfield Neighborhood (northeast of project area)
. Springfield Chamber of Commerce
. Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce
. University of Oregon
The CAG functions in an advisory role and provides recommendations to the Project
Development Team (PDT). The PDT consists often members that include representatives
from ODOT, FHW A, the cities of Eugene and Springfield, Lane County, and the CAG.
The PDT will use recommendations from the CAG, information from technical analyses,
and input from agencies and the public to make decisions concerning the project.
An Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared by ODOT to comply with the
National Environmental Policy Act requirements for environmental review. The EA will
be released for public comment in January 2007.
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
14
Planner: BJ
Chapter 2: Legal Findings
2.1 Requested Plan Amendments
Metro Plan Amendment
Authorization to construct the l-5 Willamette River replacement bridges within the
Willamette River greenway setback area, including work associated with the approaches
to the bridges and removal of the decommissioned, existing Canoe Canal and temporary
detour bridges, requires the Cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County to approve
the following Metro Plan amendment:
· An amendment in the form of an exception as required by Metro Plan, Chapter
III, Section D, Policy 11, authorizing the placement of fill within the greenway
setback a,rea associated with:
o Construction of the new bridges, (including fill associated with any
temporary bridges needed to remove the decommissioned bridge or
construct the new permanent bridges).
o Removal of the detour bridge (including fill associated with any temporary
bridges needed to remove the detour bridge) 3
Statewide Planning Goal 15 Amendment
Although the project is exempt from Statewide Planning Goal 15 (Willamette River
Greenway) because 1-5 is an existing urban use, OOOT also requests approval of a Goal
15 Metro Plan amendment as a precautionary measure:
· An amendment in the form of a goal exception to Statewide Planning Goal 15
(Willamette River Greenway), authorizing a nonwater-dependent and nonwater-
related use within the established greenway setback. Under Goal 15, the
approaches associated with the new 1-5 bridges are not considered to be water-
dependent or for water-related use.
Willakenzie Area Plan Amendment
Additionally, authorization to construct a replacement 1-5 bridge requires the City of
Eugene to approve:
3 The 2003 Metro Plan amendment approving an exception for the detour bridge provides for the removal
, , of tha.~ bridge but does not expressly authorize fiU associated with the construction tempora~emflitio", .
'bridges that are needed to remove the detour bridge. Uale necelved
',', Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 2008
15
Planner: !t~Ui
. An amendment to the Willakenzie Area Plan to permit structures and fill
associated with the new 1-5 bridges to be constructed within the first 35 feet from
the top of the riverbank within the greenway in the Willakenzie area.
TransPlan and Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)
The new bridges will be replacement bridges to the decommissioned 1-5 bridge and
Canoe Canal bridge, which are part of the 1-5 interstate highway facility whose existence
is identified in the TransPlan. As such, the new bridges will not be providing a use that
does not already exist.4 The new bridges will initially be striped to accommodate two
travel lanes in each direction. This was the striping pattern on the decommissioned
bridge, and is the current striping pattern on the detour bridge. The new bridges will be
designed to expand to three travel lanes in each direction at such time as three travel lanes
are warranted. This is consistent with TransPlan Projects 150 and 260, both of which
provide for the future expansion ofI-5 to six lanes in this area.5
The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge replacement project is in both the Metropolitan
Transportation Improvement Plan (MTIP) and the RTP. The project is part of the aTIA
III Statewide Bridge Replacement Program and is identified as "Bundle 220." The
project has funding in the amount of $180 million, which covers not only the costs of
removing the decommissioned Canoe Canal and detour bridges and constructing the
replacement bridges, but also all associated costs, including the costs for preparing
federal environmental documents and obtaining land use plan amendments and permits.
Other Permits
Following approval of these plan amendments, land use permits will be needed for bridge
construction to proceed. These permits are not being requested as part of this
application; instead, separate applications for these permits will be filed at a future time.
Needed permits will include:
City of Eugene:
. A Type III Willamette River Greenway permit under Eugene Code (Ee) 9.8800
through 9.8825 because the replacement bridges constitute "development" within
the greenway boundary.
o A Type II "WR Standards Review" approval pursuant to EC 9.4930(3)(b), 9.4980
and 9.8460 through 9.8474, for any fill, grading, vegetation removal, or new
structures within the WR conservation area.
4 Because the original 1-5 bridge is located inside an urban growth boundary, and because the bridge
predated Goal \5, no Goal \5 exceptions were required to include the b,idge in the Metro Plan and
TransPlan. Consequently, OAR 660-004-0018(4)(b) does not apply.
5 Project 150 (1-5 at Willamette River/Franklin Boulevard Interchange) provides: "Interchange
,econstruction to create one full interchange to improve operations and safety, reconstruct ramps and
bridges to mqdem standards, and provide for 6 lanes on 1-5." Project 260 (1-5 between \-105 and Hi~ay . d
58 Goshen) provides: "Widen remaining sections to 6 lanes." Date H.ecelve
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1\Z008
Planner: B~
o A Site Development Permit (or similar building permit), and a FEMA "no-rise"
certification for any construction or structures within the floodway/special flood
hazard area.
City of Springfield:
o A Type III Discretionary Use Approval under Springfield Development Code
(SDC) 25.050 and 10.030(1) because the replacement bridges will have a
significant visual impact.
o An administrative "determination" from the Springfield Planning Director
pursuant to SDC 31.240(2) that the replacement bridges and possibly the removal
of the original 1-5 bridge, Canoe Canal bridge and detour bridge, and construction
of a temporary work platform for the detour bridge, will not "diminish riparian
function" of affected riparian areas.
o A Type 1 permit to allow construction in the floodplain or flood way.
2.2 Applicable Review Procedures and Standards
Under Eugene Code (EC) 9.9700(1),6 a Metro Plan amendment requiring'an exception
not related to an urban growth boundary expansion is a "Type 1". Metro Plan
Amendment.7 Under EC 9.7730(1)(b), this kind of amendment must be approved by all
three of the governing bodies that adopted the Metro Plan - the City of Eugene, the City
of Springfield, and Lane County. EC 9.7745 sets the procedural requirements where the
three jurisdiction approval process is used. That process includes a joint public hearing
before the planning commissions of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County, followed by a
joint public hearing before the governing bodies of these local governments, then
individual decision"making by each governing body. The proposed amendment to the
Willakenzie Area Plan can be processed and considered by the City of Eugene
concurrently with the Metro Plan amendments.
The criteria for amending the Metro Plan are outlined in EC 9.7730(3) as follows:
(3) Criteria for Approval of Plan Amendment.
The following criteria shall be applied by the city council in approving or denying a
Metro Plan amendment application:
(a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide planning goals
adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission; and
(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
6 The Springfield and Lane County development codes contain similar provisions, Because Eugene is the
'eadjurisdiction on this application, ,eferences provided herein are to'the Eugene code.
7 Site-specific plan text amendments generally a,e processed as Type II Metro Plan amendments. However,
they become Type I amendments when they include goal exceptions, Pursuant to EC 9,77 I 5(I)(a), ODOT
" " .,,is su)2.mitting to ~ugene a written request for the City Council to initiate the proposed Type I ~'t Re e'lved~' }-.
. J'.~,~;-" ,~,.(amendments~~' Ui:1 e c ' ~""-$
. ., , , . ,,c' '" . ',.;,.~ ',_.. ,~ .~i
" , . Plan AInendme~t Request FEB 0 1 2008" '/,.."
., .". "'t"' f...
2/01/2008 17 ":"1;", ',.~
Planner: sJ' ,.',
To demonstrate compliance with these criteria, this application considers and makes
findings addressing:
o Statewide Planning Goal 15
o ORS 390.310 to 390.368 (Willamette Greenway Statutes)
. OAR 660, Division 4 (Goal Exceptions)
o Other relevant statewide goals
o Metro Plan Chapter III, Section 0, Policy II
o Other relevant Metro Plan and TransPlan policies (Unamended Portions)
This document has been constructed to serve as the findings of fact and statement of
reasons for Lane County and the Cities of Eugene and Springfield, so that it can be
adopted in support of a decision to approve the requested plan amendments.
2.3 Requirements for Exceptions tinder Statewide Planning
Goal 15 (Willamette River Greenway) and Metro Plan Chapter
III, Section D,Policy 11
a. Overview of Applicable Greenway Requirements
This application requests and justifies exceptions both to Statewide Planning Goal 15 and
to Metro Plan, Chapter III, Section 0, Policy II, As described in more detail below,
ODOT concludes that this project does not require a Goal 15 exception because (I)
replacing bridges and their approaches upon the same roadway alignment is a
continuation of an existing urban use, and (2) Goal 15 Section C(3)(J) allows lands
committed to urban uses within the greenway to continue as urban uses. Still, as a
precautionary measure, ODOT requests approval of a Goal 15 exception "in the
alternative" because 1-5 is an essential statewide transportation facility, a structurally safe
bridge over the Willarnette River is a critical component of this facility, time is of the
essence in completing this bridge replacement project, and ODOT seeks to avoid delays
that could occur through an appeal challenging the absence of a Goal 15 exception.
Accordingly, with regard to Goal 15, ODOT asks that the cities and county:
o Expressly find that this bridge replacement project is exempt from a Goal IS
exception, but
o Adopt a Goal 15 exception "in the alternative" nonetheless, to take effect if and
only if, on appeal, the Land Use Board of Appeals or an appellate court body
should hold that the bridge replacement project requires a Goal 15 exception.
The Metro Plan requires an exception if a transportation facility requires placing fill
within the greenway setback. Here, the demolition of the decommissioned Canoe Canal
and detour bridges, and construction of the replacement bridges will require placement of
fill within the greenway setback. This includes construction/demolition of temporary
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Receivern
FEB 0 \ s2008
Planner: 8",1
'.,"
work bridges to remove the decommissioned or detour bridges and construct the
replacement bridges. Accordingly, a Metro Plan exception is required.
b. Goal 15 Allows Existing Uses to Continue Without an Exception
As discussed in the alternative findings set out below, 1-5 is not considered to be water-
dependent or for water-related use. As such, to be located within the greenway setback, it
typjcally would require an exception to Goal 15. However, Goal 15, Section C(3)(J)
exempts certain lands within the greenway from the requirements. Specifically, "lands
committed to urban uses" are permitted to continue as urban uses:
"Development shall be directed away from the river to the
greatest degree possible; provided, however, lands
committed to urban uses within the greenway shall be
permitted to continue as urban uses..." (Emphasis added.)
Goal 15, Section K(2), defines "lands committed to urban use" in part as "those lands on
which the economic, developmental, and locational factors have, when considered
together;made the use of the property for other than urban purposes inappropriate."
ODOT's 1-5 right-of-way, including 1-5 and the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge, constitutes
"land ... committed to urban use" within the greenway as so defined. Since the 1960s,
before the WilIamette River greenway was established, 1-5 has served the mobility and
interstate commerce needs of Oregonians and other interstate travelers at this location,
The 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) classifies 1-5 as an "interstate highway" - its
highest category of state highway - and identifies it as a major freight route. As an
interstate highway, 1-5 provides connections to major cities, regions of the state, and
other states. Within the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area, it also provides
connections for regional trips. Today, approximately 49,000 vehicles, including large
numbers of trucks hauling freight, cross the Willamette River on 1-5 on a daily basis. By
2030, daily trips are expected to increase to 73,000. ODOT's management objective for
interstate highways is to provide safe and efficient high-speed continuous-flow operation
in urban and rural areas.
1-5 is critical to the efficient and reliable movement of freight within and through the
metropolitan region and the state. As the OHP notes, in 2002 nearly 76 percent of the
total freight tonnage and 82 percent of the total freight value was carried by trucks.
TransPlan recognizes the importance on-5 to move people and goods within and through
the region and state.
In summary, ODOT's 1-5 right-of-way is physically developed with an urban use
(interstate highway), and the economic, developmental, and locational factors as
described in Goal 15 Section K(2) make use of that right-of-way for other purposes
inappwl-,,;ate. Accordingly, the 1-5 right-of-way is committed to urban uses and may
continue to be so used under Goal 15 Section C(3 )(j) without need for an exception.
Date RerAived
Plan Amendment Request
. 2/01/2008
FER U ~ ?nOS
19
Plan''''''...... "'J
~ ,,: ~~ fj', ff' , a'~
.' 0, ".' ~ CI "-'
"
c. Goal 15 Alternative Findings: Need for a Goal IS Exception
Notwithstanding the analysis immediately above, ODOT asks that Eugene, Springfield,
and Lane County approve a Goal 15 Metro Plan exception "in the alternative" because
this project is time sensitive, the analysis above may be challenged, and approval of an
exception in the alternative may well avoid undue delay. Because the Goal 15 exception
would be adopted in the alternative, ODOT asks that the adopting ordinance or resolution
provide for the exception to take effect only in the event that a reviewing body, on appeal
ofthe decision, should conclude that a Goal 15 exception is necessary.
If a Goal 15 exception is required, it would be for the following reasons.
1. Application of Goal 15
Statewide Plannjng Goal 15, Willamette River Greenway, provides that:
"The qualities of the Willamette River shall be protected, conserved,
enhanced, and maintained consistent with the lawful uses present on
December 6, 1974. Intensification of' uses, changes in use, or
developments may be permitted after this date only when they are
consistent with the Willamette Greenway Statute, this goal and [the
statewide planning goals]. ,,8
An initial question is whether the bridge replacement is an "intensification" or "change of
use," or "development" as those terms are defined in Goal 15. If so, then the replacement
must be consistent with the greenway statute, Goal 15, and the other applicable standards.
Goal 15 defines "intensification of use" to mean "any additions that increase or expand
the area or amount of an existing use, or the level of activity." [Goal 15, Section K(3)
(emphasis added)]. Because the proposed replacement bridges would be striped for four
travel lanes (two in each direction) consistent with existing conditions, they would not
increase or expand the amount of traffic currently using the bridge. Existing vehicle trips
would merely shift over from the detour bridge to the replacement bridges. However,
because the replacement bridges would have a wider footprint than the decommissioned
bridge to accommodate future restriping from four to six travel lanes, the project arguably
increases or expands the area of the existing use. As such, it can be argued that the
project constitutes an "intensification of use."
:42~~~;~;{" '"
4'.,1: -, 1'.i ;'~"
~,'~ "'j'''l*''''t
~r\
Goal 15 defines" change in use" as "making a different use of the land or water than that
which existed on December 6, 1975." [Goal 15, Section K(l)l. This includes "a change
which requires construction, alterations of the land, water, or other areas outside of
existing buildings or structures and that substantially alters or affects the land or water."
Because the replacement bridges would serve the same function as the decommissioned
1-5 bridge and Canoe Canal bridge, namely to maintain connectivity and mobility for all
I...i ,
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200~0
Planner: BJ
. , ': 8 The Willamette G,eenway statutes a,e in ORS chapter 390.310 to 390.368.
..\
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
: -~-.-
users of 1-5 over the Willamette River in the Eugene/Springfield metropolitan area, this
project does not involve a "change in use."
The statewide planning goals define "development" as "[t]he act, process, or result of
developing." In turn, "develop" is defined as "[t]o bring about growth or availability; to
construct or alter a structure; ... to make a physical change in the use or appearance of
land, ...." [Statewide Planning Goals, Definitions (emphasis added)]. Given the breadth
of this definitjon, repair or construction of a new bridge of any size could be interpreted
as involving "development," even if the use is not changed or intensified. It follows that
the bridge constjtutes a "development" and that Goal 15 applies.
2. Goal 15 and OAR 660-004-0022(6) Require Exceptions for
Uses that are Neither Water-Dependent nor Water-Related
The Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDq administrative rule
governing goal exceptions, OAR 660-004-0022(6), states that within urban areas, the
proposed siting of uses that are neither water-dependent nor water-related within the
Willamette River greenway setback area requires exceptions. The rule provides:
"(6) Willamette Greenway: Within an urban area designated' on' the
approved WiIlamette Greenway Boundary maps, the siting of uses which
are neither water-dependent nor water,related within the setback line
required by Section C3.k of the Goal may be approved where reasons
demonstrate the following:
(a) The use will not have a significant adverse effect on the greenway
values of the site under construction or on adjacent land or water areas;
(b) The use will not significantly reduce the sites available for water-
dependent or water-related uses within the jurisdiction;
(c) The use will provide a significant public benefit; and
(d) The use is consistent with the Legislative findings and policy in ORS
390.314 and the Willamette Greenway Plan approved by LCDC under
ORS 390.322." (Emphasis added.)
Because ODOT is not siting a new use, but rather replacing an existing bridge with a new
bridge, jt is not clear whether this section applies.9 For purposes of this analysis, ODOT
assumes, without conceding, that it does apply. The proposed replacement bridges are
located within both the Eugene-Springfield urban growth boundary and the Willamette
River' greenway setback lines. If the proposed replacement bridges are neither water-
9 Although this rule does not expressly distinguish between new and existing uses, LlJBA or an appellate
court. could find that the rule was intended to apply only to the siting of new uses ,ather ~liI;e R . d
,} ~ep!a~".~~ntofa~e~jstjng use. UdU eCAIVe
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 2008
21
Planner: b,J
,. ". ~" '
dependent nor water-related, they will require an exception demonstrating compliance
with these standards unless otherwise exempted by Goal 15 Section C(3)(j).
3. The 1-5 Replacement Bridge Approaches are not Water-
Dependent or for Water-Related Use
Under Goal 15, structures that are "water-dependent" or "water, related" are permitted
within the greenway setback area. As defined in the statewide planning goals, "water-
dependent" means:
"A use or activity which can be carried out only on, in, or adjacent to
water areas because the use requires access to the water body for water-
borne transportation, recreation, energy production, or source of water."
"Water-related" means:
"Uses which are not directly dependent upon access to a water body, but
which provide goods or services that are directly associated with water-
dependent land or waterway use, and which, if not located adjacent to
water, would result in a public loss of quality in the goods or services
offered. Except as necessary for water-dependent or water-related uses or
facilities, ... roads and highways ... are not generally considered
dependent on or related to water location needs." (Emphasis added,)
Given the highlighted language and the fact that (1) the 1-5 approaches to the replacement
bridges will require fill within the greenway setback,1O and (2) LCDC, in the context of
the statewide coastal goals (Goals 16-19), has ordered that bridge approaches requiring
fill are not water-dependent or water-related uses, the project should not be considered a
water-dependent or water-related use. II Accordingly, the replacement bridge project
requires a Goal 15 exception unless otherwise exempted by Goal 15, Section C(3)(j),
d. Metro Plan, Chapter III, Section D, Policy 11 Requires an Exception
to Place Fill in the Greenway Setback
Independent of Statewide Planning Goal 15, the Metro Plan's acknowledged greenway
policies require a goal exception to locate a non-water-dependent transportation facility
within the greenway setback if the proposed use involves placement offill in the setback.
See Metro Plan, Chapter III, Section D, Policy 11 [formerly policy 13], which provides:
10 Tn the vicinity of the T-5 bridge, Springfield has adopted setback lines for the WilIamelte Rive, on both
the north and south sides, The north side setback parallels the north edge of the tree line adjacent to the
Canoe Canal, extending from the 1-5 cente,line to the intake structure for the Canoe Canal at the Aspen
St,eet/West D Street boat ramp, The south side setback is five feet from the top of the bank from the T-5
centerline to a point approximately 1000 feet east. Eugene has established a setback Iinc only fo, the north
side of the river, which extends 35 feet from the river.
II Tn conve,sations with the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) staff, the
Department,>yas unable to identitY precedence one way 0' the other with respect to Goal 15, Their ,
suggestion was to assume that Goal 15 would be interp,eted in a manne, simila, to the coastal Bate R ece 1\, ed
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
FE~20 1 2008
Planner: ~J
"The taking of an exception shall be required if a nonwater-dependent
transportation facility requires placing of fill within the WilIamette River
Greenway setback. "
As both Springfield and Eugene interpret their plans, the replacement bridges are not
water-dependent transportation facilities. Consequently, because the project will involve
placing fill within the greenway setback, it will require a Goal 15 exception pursuant to
this Metro Plan policy, Likewise, temporary work bridges needed to construct the
replacement bridges or demolish the decommissioned bridge or detour bridge would not
be considered water-dependent transportation facilities and will require goal exceptions
to the extent they require fill. The exceptions taken herein are intended to include all such
bridges.
2.4 Compliance with OAR 660, Division 4 Exception
Requirements
The requirements for Goal exceptions are outlined m OAR 660, Division 4. These
requirements are met for the following reasons,
OAR 660-004-0018 Planning and Zoning for Exception Areas
(4) "Reasons" Exceptions:
(a) When a local government takes an exception under the "Reasons" section of
ORS 197, 732(1)(c) and OAR 660-004-0020 through 660-004-0022, plan and zone
designations must limit the uses, density, public facilities and services, and
activities to only those that are justified in the exception;
(b) When a local government changes the types or intensities of uses or public
facilities and services within an area approved as a "Reasons" exception, a new
"Reasons" exception is required;
The taking of goal exceptions requires and results in amendments to the Metro Plan.12
The exception provides for the continuation of the existing use ofT - 5 by motor vehicles
for interstate mobility and commerce purposes. The new 1-5 Willamette River bridges are
needed to accommodate that use.13
The new bridges will be replacement bridges to the decommissioned 1-5 bridge and
Canoe Canal bridge, which are part of the 1-5 interstate highway facility whose existence
is identified in the TransPlan.,As such, the new bridges will not be providing a.use that
12 See ORS 197,732(8), defining "exception" as a comprehensive plan provision, including an amendment
to an acknowledged comprehensive plan.
13 As used in these findings, reference to the new [-5 WiIlamette River Bridges includes the ~r~"ihes ll\ .
those bridges and furthe, includes the new bridges crossing the Canoe ~anal and their approatlttUe NeCelVed
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 2008
23
Planner: Bj~?
does not already exist.14 The new bridges will initially be striped to accommodate two
travel lanes in each direction. This was the striping pattern on the decommissioned
bridge, and is the current striping pattern on the detour bridge. The new bridges will be
designed to expand to three travel lanes in each direction at such time as three travel lanes
are warranted. This is consistent with TransPlan Projects ISO and 260, both of which
provide for the future expansion ofI-5 to six lanes in this area. 15
OAR 660-004-0022 Reasons Necessary to Justify an Exception Under Goal 2, Part
II(c)
An exception under Goal 2, Part II(c) can be taken for any use not allowed by the
applicable goal(s), The types of reasons that mayor may not be used to justifY certain
types of uses not allowed on resource lands are set forth in the following sections of this
rule: ...
"(6) Willamette Greenway: Within an urban area designated on the approved Willamette
Greenway Boundary maps, the siting of uses which are, neither water-dependent nor
water-related within the setback line required by Section C.3.k of the Goal may be
approved where reasons demonstrate the following:
(a) The use will not have a significant adverse effect on the greenway values of
the site under construction or on adjacent land or wate'r areas;... "
ODOT is proposing to construct a new replacement bridge, in the form of two new
parallel bridges over the Willamette River and Canoe Canal, to replace the original 1-5
Willamette River Bridge and Canoe Canal Bridge and the temporary detour bridge across
the Willamette River. The new bridges would constitute a portion of 1-5, an interstate
highway and major freight route providing connections to major cities and regions of the
state and to other states. The new brid~es would be located in the same location as the
decommissioned and detour bridges, 1 although they would require minor shifts of
alignment and reconnection of portions of the Franklin Boulevard northbound and
southbound on/off ramps as dictated by bridge design. Although initially striped for four
lanes, the new bridges would be designed to accommodate six lanes of traffic. They
would also be designed to allow future widening of Franklin Boulevard and to not
prohibit possible future improvements to the Franklin Boulevard Interchange, These
design features are consistent with TransPlan Projects ISO and 260.
14 Because the original 1-5 bridge is located inside an urban growth boundary, and because the bridge
predated Goal 15, no Goal 15 exceptions were required to include the bridge in the Metro Plan and
T,ansPlan, Consequently, OAR 660-004-00l8(4)(b) does not apply.
15 Project 150 (1-5 at Willamette River/Franklin Boulevard Interchange) provides: "Interchange
,econstruction to create one full inte,change to improve operations and safety, reconstruct ramps and
bridges to modem standa,ds, and provide for 6 lanes on 1-5." Project 260 (1-5 between 1-105 and Highway
58 Goshen) provides: "Widen remaining sections to 6 lanes,"
16 The new Canoe Canal bridges a,e extensions of the new [-5 Willamette River replacement bridges and
" .1d
would be,located in essentially the same location as the existing Canoe Canal bridOate Received
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008 FEB 01 200824
PI~nnAr' R.I
The replacement bridges and all associated fill will be located entirely within ODOT
right-of-way. Hence, the "site under construction" is the ODOT right-of-way extending
from approximately the Glenwood Interchange northward across the Willamette River to
CentenniaUMLK Blvd. North of the Willamette River, Alton Baker Park lies west and
East Alton Baker Park lies east of the 1-5 right-of-way. The area adjacent to ODOT's
right-of-way is used as open space. Access connecting both sides of the park is provided
through ODOT's right-of-way under the original 1-5 bridge. The park is part of a larger
regional riverfront park and open space system serving multiple recreational needs of the
Eugene-Springfield community. Along the greenway, the open space contributes to the
protection of natural, scenic, and recreational greenway values, including fish and
wildlife habitat, water quality, protection from flooding, and public recreation. A bicycle-
pedestrian path traverses the length of this riverfront park system, linking Eugene with
Springfield. This path traverses the ODOT right-of-way underneath the original bridge.
Because the replacement bridges and associated fill will be located within existing ODOT
right-of-way, which is outside Alton Baker Park and East Alton Baker Park, there will be
no reduction in the amount of permanent open space available at the parks. Because the
bridges replace an existing, structurally defective bridge, there will be no change in use.
Existing park and river \lsers are accustomed to experiencing interstate travel at this
location. The bicycle-pedestrian path linking Eugene and Springfield will continue to
traverse ODOT's right-of-way below the new bridges. Public access to the river will not
be affected, and protection to riparian areas and fish and wildlife habitat will be
maintained to the greatest possible extent.!7 For all of these reasons, there will be no
significant adverse effect on the greenway values of either the site under construction or
the adjacent land and water areas.
Prior to construction of the replacement bridges, the decommissioned bridge and Canoe
Canal bridge will be demolished. Following construction of the replacement bridges, the
temporary detour bridge will he demolished. The new bridges will occupy no greater area
than the combined area occupied by the decommissioned Canoe Canal and detour
bridges, and thus will have no significant adverse effect on views of the Willamette
River.
The project will create some short term construction impacts, but these impacts will be
temporary in nature and have no lasting adverse effects. Staging for bridge construction is
likely to occupy up to five acres of park open space for up to four years. ODOT is
working with the City of Eugene and Willamalane Park and Recreation District to
develop a plan to handle staging, It is likely the bicycle/pedestrian path crossing ODOT's
right-of-way will be closed for periods of up to a few days at a time; however,. another
path under the Canoe Canal Bridge, located approximately 600 feet to the north of this
path, would remain open during any closures to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian
traffic. Bridge construction and demolition, including construction and removal of
t7 Because the ODOT right-of-way "under construction" is outside East Alton Baker Park and committed
to u,ban use through development that preceded establishment of the WiIlamette River G,eenway, it is
questionable whether it has "greenway values." [fit does, those values would be in the f"f'li Of;jl)(nDeCe',ved
views of the park and river, both of which the project retains. U al\:::l n
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 Z008
25
Planner: BJ
'~~
associated temporary work platforms, will impact riparian vegetation. within the
greenway. Through the permitting process, these impacts can and will be minimized to
the extent practicable and mitigated, with all areas disturbed by the project returned to
conditions at least as good as they were before the project.
At the conclusion of bridge construction, fill placed for the detour bridge and for
temporary work bridges will be removed and those areas will be restored. The new
replacement bridges will span the WiIlamette River and Canoe Canal and not interfere
with current boat use on the river or the canal. Piers will be placed in the Willamette
River to support the bridge structures. The new bridges will have one pier near the center
of the river and one on or near the south bank. By comparison, the decommissioned
bridge has five piers in the water, and the detour bridge has six, so the new bridges will
provide a substantial net reduction in piers. All in-river work and pilings will comply
with all state, federal, and local regulations. Access to the river bank will remain
unchanged.
The reduction in the total number of piers and in the number of piers within the
Willamette River will greatly improve views of the river and, as such, contribute to a
significant positive visual impact. Also, because a key consideration of the project is
providing an aesthetically pleasing solution that recognizes the scenic beauty of the
project area, ODOT has considered a range of bridge types and pier options, taking
carefully into consideration community input obtained through a public process. At this
phase, ODOT has developed two conceptual schematics illustrating the new 1-5 bridges,
but ODOT has not developed detailed engineering design plans. Ultimately, selection of
the bridge type for each segment will be dependent primarily on aesthetic considerations
and budget.
In summary, while construction activities will temporarily impact greenway values, the
new 1-5 Willamette River bridges will have no significant adverse effect on the greenway
values of ODOT's right-of-way (if any) or the adjacent park lands and water areas. With
a net reduction of piers in the water, and a design process that encourages and considers
community input, the overall visual effect will be positive. Through mitigation, including
the removal of fill and restoration of native vegetation, affected riparian and recreational
values will be fully restored.
"(b) The use will not significantly reduce the sites available for water-dependent
or water-related uses within the jurisdiction;... "
The two new replacement bridges over 1-5 will not reduce any sites available for water-
dependent or water-related uses in Eugene or Springfield because the bridges will be
constructed entirely within the same existing ODor 1-5 right-of-way where the
decommissioned 1-5 bridge and temporary detour bridge are located. The new bridges
will have one pier each near the center of the river and one pier on or near the south bank.
In contrast, the decommissioned bridge has five piers in the water, and the detour bridge
Plan Amendment Request
.', 2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 201W
Planner: BJ
\.'.,
has six. This net reduction in piers in the water will be beneficial for water-dependent
uses.18
"(c) The use will provide a significant public benefit; and... "
Traversing the entire length of the west coast from the US/Mexico border to British
Columbia, Canada, 1-5 is the primary north-south highway corridor serving California,
Oregon, and Washington. The facility provides for the significant movement of people,
freight, and other services, and serves as the backbone for jnternational, interstate, and
intrastate commerce. On average, approximately 49,000 vehicles cross the Willamette
River through the Eugene/Springfield area on 1-5 each day, with numbers reaching
greater than 63,000. Approximately 16 to 18 percent of daily trips are made by tractor
trailer rigs hauling freight By the year 2030, 1-5 is expected to accommodate
approximately 73,000 daily vehicle trips,
Arguably, 1-5 is the most important road in the State of Oregon and the most important
freight corridor on the west coast Clearly, the connectivity and mobility that 1-5 provides
to both the local community and to intrastate and interstate travelers constitutes a
significant public benefit This beriefit is recognized in the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan
and in TransPlan.
"(d) The use is consistent wilh the Legislalivefindings and policy in ORS 390,314
and the Willamette Greenway Plan approved by LCDC under ORS 390,322. "
The legislative findings and policy in ORS 390.314 are:
ORS 390.314, Legislative findings and policy
(I) The Legislative Assembly finds that, to protect and preserve the natural,
scenic, and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River, to preserve
and restore historical sites, structures, facilities, and objects on lands along the
Willamette River for public education and e'njoyment and to further the state
policy established under ORS 390,010, it is in the public interest to develop and
maintain a natural, scenic, historical, and recreational greenway upon lands
along the Willamette River to be known as the Willamette River Greenway,
The 1-5 Willamette River bridge predates the adoption of Goal 15. As an element of 1-5,
the bridge is provided for in TransPlan, which has been acknowledged to be in
compliance witlJ all statewide planning goals. Construction of the replacement bridges
and removal of the decommissioned Canoe Canal and detour bridges will temporarily
affect greenway values during construction, but these impacts can and will be avoided or
minimized to the extent practicable and mitigated. Areas disturbed by the project can and
will be returned to a condition at least as good as they were before the project
18 The existing Canoe Canal bridge completely spans the Canoe Canal and adjacent bike path. The
replacement bridges will do likewise. Date Received
Plan Amendment Request
:2/01/2008
FEB ~ 1 2008
P' OR
,< . :'1.nrJ~~r: D."
(2) In providing for the development and maintenance of the Willamette River
Greenway, the Legislative Assembly:
(a) Recognizing the need for coordinated planning for such greenway, finds it
necessary to provide for development and implementation of a plan for such
greenway through the cooperative efforts of the state and units of local
government.
The State of Oregon and units of local government, including Lane County and the cities
of Springfield and Eugene, have cooperated in the implementation of greenway planning
as required by legislative intent. The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Replacement Project,
subject to this application, is being permitted through this established local and statewide
greenway planning process. In preparing this application, ODOT has worked closely with
staff from Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County, and it has coordinated with the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) as well.
(b) Recognizing the need of the people of this state for existing residential,
,commercial, and agricultural use of lands along the Willamette River, finds it
necessary to permit the continuation of existing uses of lands that are included
within such greenway; but, for the benefit of the people of this state, also to limit
the intensification and change in the use of such lands so that such uses shall
remain, to the greatest possible degree, compatible with the preservation of the
natural, scenic, historical and recreational qualities of such lands,
1-5 and the 1-5 Willamette River bridge predate Goal 15. Like the original bridge, the
replacement bridges and their approaches will be located within ODOT's established 1-5
right-of-way, thus avoiding significant adverse effects on the greenway and greenway
values. Because the new bridges will be striped for four travel lanes (two in each
direction), they will not intensify the existing use. Still, the new bridges will be sized to
accommodate future restriping to six travel lanes. Because that restriping, anticipated by
TransPlan projects 150 and 260, will not require additional bridge construction within the
greenway, the use, when it becomes intensified, will remain compatible with the
preservation of the natural, scenic, historical, and recreational qualities of greenway
lands,
(c) Recognizing that the use of lands forfarm use is compatible with the purposes
of the Willamette River Greenway, finds that the use of lands for farm use should
continue within the greenway without restriction.
The 1-5 Willamette River replacement bridges will be located entirely within the
urbanized area of Springfield and Eugene, and not upon or near farm land within the
greenway boundary. For this reason, the project will in no way impede the continuation
of farm uses within the greenway.
(d) Recognizing the need for central coordination of such greenway for the best
, .' Jnterests of all the people of this state, finds it necessary to place the
Plan Amendment Request
'-2/0112008
Date Received
FE~8 0 1 200S
Planner: BJ'
I
responsibility for the coordination of the development and maintenance of such
greenway in the State Parks and Recreation Department.
Constructing the 1-5 replacement bridges in no way limits or changes Oregon State Parks'
responsibilities for the coordination of the development and maintenance of the
greenway.
(e) Recognizing the lack of need for the acquisition offee title to all lands along
the Willamette River for exclusive public use for recreational purposes in such
greenway, finds it necessary to limit the area within such greenway that may be
acquired for state parks and recreational areas and for public recreational use
within the boundaries of units of local government along the Willamette River.
The replacement brjdges and approaches will be lo'cated within existing public right-of-
way that has been used for interstate highway purposes since before the enactment of the
Willamette River greenway statutes and Goal 15. The land is in the public domain and
will remain in the public domain after completion of construction of the new replacement
bridges and demolition and removal of the decommissioned bridge, Canoe Canal bridge,
and detour bridge,
OAR 660-004-0022(6)(d) also requires a finding that the use be consistent with the
Willamette River Greenway Plan as acknowledged by the Land Conservation and
Development Commission. This plan is implemented and embodied in each relevant
jurisdiction's plan policy and codes. For Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County, the
Metro Plan Willamette River greenway element serves as the greenway plan for the
segment of the river running through the metropolitan area. Eugene and Springfield also
have established greenway setback lines and adopted land development ordinances,
which proposed developments within the greenway must be in compliance.
Nearly all of the policies in the Willamette River greenway, river corridors, and
waterway element of the Metro Plan are a directory to the jurisdictions and aimed at
matters that have no bearing on or direct relevance to this application. 19 One policy that is
arguably relevant directs that land use regulations take into account such concerns as
recreation, resource, and wildlife protection. Following plan amendment approval,
ODOT will apply to the cities of Eugene and Springfield for permits issued pursuant to
land use regulations adopted to implement Statewide Planning Goals IS and 5 (Natural
Resources). Those regulations take recreation, resource, and wildlife protection and other
concerns into account. Through approval conditions imposed during the permitting
process, this policy can and will be achieved,20
19 For instance, there a,e policies addressing industrial development along the Willamelte River, expansion
of water ,elated pa,ks, or public access in agricultural areas.
20 In Eugene, these permits include a Willamelte River Greenway permits and a WR Standards R~" Received
permits in Springfield, they include a Discretional Use permits and a Planning Director determina~J:MP
." '. ,; ,.. the. pr,oject will not diminish riparian functions.
<'.'
FEB 0 1 200S
Plan' Amendment Request
2/0112008
Planner: BJ
,_t ~j;;.. ,; -"..' _ :., .
~--
'.,l,.'
~-~:;; ~ ;'
A second policy provides that specific use management considerations and requirements
of Goal IS be applied where they are not specifically addressed in policy or land use
designations elsewhere in the Plan or in local refinement plans. In this regard, OOOT
notes that TransPlan expressly provides for 1-5 and its bridges within the greenway and
the park, as does the East Alton Baker Park Plan, although it is not a refinement plan. In
addition, Goal IS and the Greenway Plan provide for the continuation of existing urban
uses within the greenway. As noted earlier, 1-5 within the OOOT right-of-way is an
existing, committed urban use.
Finally, Policy II, identified earlier, requires a goal exception to place fill within the
greenway setback area. An exception to authorize fill in the greenway is part of this
application.
OAR 660-004-0020 Goal 2, Part II(c), Exception Requirements
(1) If a jurisdiction determines there are reasons consistent with OAR 660-004-0022 to
use resource lands for uses not allowed by the applicable Goal or to allow public
facilities or services not allowed by the applicable Goal, the justification shall be set
forth in the comprehensive plan as an exception.
Reasons consistent with OAR 660-004-0022(6) are set forth above to allow the
construction of two 1-5 Willamette River replacement bridges and the removal of the
decommissioned bridge, existing Canoe Canal bridge, and temporary detour bridge,
including the placement of fill needed for the new bridges or for temporary work bridges
required to construct the new bridges or remove the decommissioned or detour bridges.
The justifications are set forth in the comprehensive plan as an exception,
(2) The four factors in Goal 2 Part !I(c) required to be addressed when taking an
exception to a Goal are:
(a) "Reasons justifY why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should
not apply": The exception shall set forth the facts and assumptions used as the
basis for determining that a state policy embodied in a goal should not apply to
specific properties or situations, including the amount of land for the use being
planned and why the use requires a location on resource land;
The reasons justifying why the replacement bridges should be permitted within the
greenway setback area, and why associated fill should be permitted, are those addressed
above in the analysis demonstrating compliance with the criteria in OAR 660-004-
0022(6). Again, because Goal 15 exempts existing urban uses, a Goal 15 exception is not
required to locate a nonwater-dependent and nonwater-related use within the greenway;
however, an exception to the Metro Plan is needed to allow additional fill to be placed in
the greenway. Here, approximately 30,000 cubic yards of fill will be placed within
ODOT's existing 1-5 right-of-way, while approximately 61,000 cubic yards offill will be
removed.
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 111 200S .
-:00" ~"...
'.
( ~~
PIAnnAr: At I
< ..'
. { ."
Except for a few acres of park land needed temporarily for staging construction, all
development will occur within ODOrs existing 1-5 right-of-way, which is not resource
land. The bridge requires a location over the WiIlamette River greenway because 1-5
already exists both north and south of the WiIlamette River and the highway cannot
practicably be relocated to avoid crossing the river.
(b) "Areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably
accommodate the use ":
(A) The exception shall indicate on a map or otherwise describe the location of
possible alternative areas considered for the use, which do not require a new
exception. The area for which the exception is taken shall be identified;
(B) To show why the particular site is justified, it is necessary to discuss why
other areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably
accommodate the proposed use. Economic factors can be considered along with
other relevant factors in determining that the use cannot reasonably be
accommodated in other areas. Under the alternative factor the following
questions shall be addressed: .
(i) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on nonresource land that
would not require an exception, including increasing the density of uses on
nonresource land? Ifnot, why not?
(ii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on resource land that is
already irrevocably committed to nonresource uses, not allowed by the applicable
Goal, including resource land in existing rural centers, or by increasing the
density of uses on committed lands? If not, why not?
(iii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated inside an urban growth
boundary? Ifnot, why not?
(iv) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated without the provision of
a proposed public facility or service? If not, why not?
(C) This alternative areas standard can be met by a broad review of similar types
of areas rather than a review of specific alternative sites. Initially, a local
government adopting an exception need assess only whether those similar types of
areas in the vicinity could not reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Site-
specific comparisons are not required of a local government taking an exception,
unless another party to the local proceeding can describe why there are specific
sites that can more reasonably accommodate the proposed use. A detailed
evaluation of specific alternative sites is thus not required unless such sites are
specifically described with facts to support the assertion that the sites are more
reasonable by another party during the local exceptions proceeding.
Plan Amendment Request
I:: j .2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 2l 200S
Planner: BJ
,', -,,'
~
An 1-5 replacement bridge is needed because the decommissioned bridge is structurally
unsafe and the detour bridge was not constructed to accommodate anticipated traffic
volumes over the long term, nor does it meet current seismic standards. The replacement
bridges and their approaches will be located entirely within ODOT's existing 1-5 right-of-
way. Because the Willamette River is quite wide in the vicinity ofI-5, piers will again be
needed within the setback area to support the proposed replacement bridges; however,
fewer piers will be used compared to existing conditions. In addition, fill is required to
support the approaches to the new bridges, including the new bridges over the Canoe
Canal.
Given the nonwater dependent and non water-related nature of the use, and given that fill
would be required for pier support and bridge approaches regardless of where in the
vicinity the bridge is located, there are no alternative sites crossing the Willamette River
that would not also require a new exception. It is noted that the proposed use will be
located inside an urban growth boundary on land that is neither agricultural nor forest
land. By remaining within the existing ODOT right-of-way, the project avoids significant
impacts to park lands. Because transportation improvements, including bridges, are
considered public facilities, the use cannot be reasonably accommodated without the
provision of the proposed public facility.
(c) The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences
resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce
adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result
from the same proposal being located in other areas requiring a Goal exception.
The exception shall describe the characteristics of each alternative areas
considered by the jurisdiction for which an exception might be taken, the typical
advantages and disadvantages of using the area for a use not allowed by the
Goal, and the typical positive and negative consequences resulting from the use at
the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. A detailed
evaluation of specific alternative sites is not required unless such sites are
specifically described with facts to support the assertion that the sites have
significantly fewer adverse impacts during the local exceptions proceeding. The
exception shall include the reasons why the consequences of the use at the chosen
site are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same
proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the
proposed site, Such reasons shall include but are not limited to, the facts used to
determine which resource land is least productive; the ability to sustain resource
uses near the proposed use; and the long-term economic impact on the general
area caused by irreversible removal of the land from the resource base. Other
possible impacts include the effects of the proposed use on the water table, on the
costs of improving roads and on the costs to special service districts;
No other sites requiring exceptions are being considered for this use. This is because the
use is not a new use, but rather the replacement of an existing, structurally deficient
bridge within an existing right-of-way. Locating the replacement bridges within the
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 0 1J:2200S
PI;:::tnner: B~'"
,-
~
existing right-of-way is both necessary and practicable because that right-of-way lines up
with the existing 1-5 approaches to the north and south,
Relocating the bridge replacement project outside the existing 1-5 right-of-way would
require ODOT to relocate the approaches at considerable additional cost and impact to
not only the greenway, but also to protected park and recreational resources, including
East Alton Baker Park and the Whilamut Natural Area.21 Further, relocating the bridge
could require the closure of one or more existing interchanges or ramps, result in
demolition of residences and businesses, and result in a hazardous geometry due to the
presence of immovable geologic features. Alternative bridge alignment locations to the
north or south of the existing footprint and right-of-way were dismissed from further
analysis due to the following jmpacts:
· Right-of-way would need to be acquired from Alton Baker Park, which is
prohibited under Section 4(f) of the federal Department of Transportation Act of
1966 unless there are no other prudent and feasible alternatives,
· Right-of-way wo.uld need to be acquired from homes and/or businesses on the
south side of the river that would not be required if the highway remains on its
'current alignment. " . "
· A shifted highway would be closer to existing homes, resulting in higher noise
and visual impacts.
· Major high-tension power transmission Ijnes are located on both sides of the
bridge and one would need to be relocated if the alignment was shifted.
Given the replacement nature of this project, the fact that crossing the Willamette River
at some location is unavoidable, and ODOT's inability to realign 1-5 on adjoining lands
based on federal restrictions protecting park lands, there simply are no feasible and
prudent alternatives to re-using the existing 1-5 right-of-way. Accordingly, in terms of
economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences, there are no areas warranting
comparison. Again, ODOT notes that 1-5 is arguably the most important highway in the
State of Oregon and the most important freight corridor on the west coast. The
connectivity and mobility it provides statewide, interstate, and regional travelers provides
tremendous benefits both economically and socially, The ability to rebuild within the
existing ODOT 1-5 right-of-way minimizes energy consumption and environmental
impacts, as the current right-of-way use for interstate travel purposes is maintained. As
such, the right-of-way is the least productive land in the immediate area in terms of
sustaining resource uses. Its continued use for this purpose also means that no other
resource or recreational lands need be removed from the resource base.
(d) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so
rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. The exception
shall describe how the proposed use will be rendered compatible with adjacent
land uses. The exception shall demonstrate that the proposed use is situated in
21 Because building the new b,idges within the existing ODOT right-of-way is a feasible and prudent
alternative, Section 4(1) of the fede,al Department of Transportation Act of 1966 prevents ODO.I,.from
approving an alternative that would require right-of-way acquisition from East Alton Baker pavate
Received
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FE~3 0 1 200S
Planner: BJ
such a manner as to be compatible with surrounding natural resources and
resource management or production practices, Compatible is not intended as an
absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with
adjacent uses.
Compatibility with greenway and GoalS resource values associated with the Willamette
River, riparian areas both north and south of the river, East Alton Baker Park, and the
Whilamut Natural Area can and will be ensured through compliance with acknowledged
Eugene and Springfield permitting requirements adopted to implement Goals 15 and 5.
Required permits are identified in Section 2.1 of these findings. As noted earlier, the
Willamette River Bridge is an existing use within the ODOT right-of-way. This proposal
replaces the original bridge with two new bridges: one for northbound traffic, the other
for southbound traffic. It also removes the detour bridge. Given that a bridge has been
accommodating highway traffic in this area for decades, most new impacts will be
associated with bridge construction or demolition. By remaining within the existing
ODOT right-of-way, and employing Best Management Practices and other impact
avoidance or mitigation techniques identified or required during the local permitting
processes, impacts to surrounding natural resource lands can be minimized to protect
natural resource qualities in and the use and enjoyment of the Wilhimette River, the
Willamette River greenway, and East Alton Baker Park.
2.5 Amendments to Willakenzie Area Plan
The Willakenzie Area Plan is a refinement plan adopted by the City of Eugene in 1992.
Under EC 9.8421 through 9.8424, amendments to existing refinement plans are permitted
in order to address, among other things, changes made to the Metro Plan, such as the goal
exceptions identified above. The procedures of this code section apply where, as here, the
requested changes are specific rather than comprehensive to an entire refinement plan.
Under EC 9.8424, proposed refinement plan amendments are reviewed for consistency
with the statewide planning goals, applicable provisions of the Metro Plan, and remaining
portions of the refinement plan. Compliance with the statewide goals is addressed in
Section 2,6 below. Compliance with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan, TransPlan,
and unamended portions of the Willakenzie Area Plan is addressed in Section 2.7, below.
The proposed Willakenzie Area Plan amendment that ODOT is requesting is needed to
allow the continued use ofI-5 within the Willakenzie area. As explained below, it also is
needed to maintain internal consistency between the Willakenzie Area Plan, Metro Plan,
and TransPlan. In all likelihood, when the Willakenzie Area Plan was written and
approved, no one foresaw or anticipated a need to decommission that bridge for safety
reasons and replace it with a new bridge. In this regard, the project reflects a substantial
change in circumstance that was not anticipated at the time the refinement plan was
adopted. Under EC 9.8424(2)(e), the city can approve a refinement plan amendment on
h. b . 22
t IS aSIs.
22 The ~mendment can also be approved under EC 9.8424(2)(b) - new invenIory material that refi\es~,ll, R . ed
st~tewide planning goal. In particular, Goal 12, through the T,ansportation Planning Rule, directlJalt:: ecel ~
. Plan Amendment Request
.' -2/01/2008
FEB 01 20m:
34
Planner: BJ
.",
The criteria for amending a Refinement Plan are outlined in EC 9.8424 as follows:
The planning commission shall evaluate proposed refinement plan amendments based on
the criteria set forth below, andforward a recommendation to the city council. The city
council shall decide whether to act on the application. If the city council decides to act,
it shall approve, approve with modifications or deny a proposed refinement plan
amendment. Approval, or approval with modifications shall be based on compliance with
the following criteria:
(I) The refinement plan amendment is consistent with all of the following:
(a) Statewide planning goals.
(b) Applicable provisions of the Metro Plan.
(c) Remaining portions of the refinement plan.
(2) The refinement plan amendment addresses one or more of the following:
(a) An error in the publication of the refinement plan.
(b) New inventory material which relates to a statewide planning goal.
(c) New or amended community policies.
(d) New or amended provisions in afederallaw or regulation, state statute,
state regulation, statewide planning goal, or state agency and use plan.
(e) A change of circumstances in a substantial manner that was not
anticipated at the time the refinement plan was adopted.
The Willakenzie Area Plan encompasses an area north of the Willamette River that
would be affected by the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project. As relevant to the bridge
project, the Plan sets out "use management standards" that it deems consistent with Goal
15 and that "shall apply to development within the greenway in the Willakenzie area."
These standards are explicitly incorporated in the Eugene Code's criteria for Willamette
greenway permits.
The following use management standard is relevant to this application. It is of particular
concern to ODOT because, in its current form, it does not appear to permit the project to
go forward:
"1. Provision that all new structures, expansion of existing structures,
drives, parking areas, or storage areas shall not be permitted within the
first 35 feet back from the top of the riverbank, unless the location of the
Metropolitan Planning Organizations and local governments to p,epare and amend transportation system
plans that include "an inventory and genera] assessment of existing .., transportation facilities and services
by function, type, capacity, and condition." [OAR 660-0]2-0020(3)(a)], The inventory mate,ia] on the
condition of the now-decommissioned 1-5 bridge relates to this requirement of Goal 12 and to its directive
in OAR 660-0]2-0020(1) that transportation system plans "establish a coordinated network of
transport;at,ion facilities adequate to serve state, regional and local transportation needs," A safe anb
properly functioning 1-5 WilIamelte River b,idge clearly falls within this standard. ate
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Received
F~B 0 1 200S _
Planner: BJ
jloodway boundary requires a greater separation. There are three
exceptions to this standard:
A. Structures designed solely for recreational use...
B. Public improvements, including pedestrian and bicycle trails, public
plazas, and similar amenities, but excluding roads and parking areas, are
exempt from the setback requirements specified above.
C. Structures existing as of the date of adoption of this plan shall be
allowed to rebuilt at the same distance from the river that they were
before destruction by fire, flood, or other disaster. "
As noted, the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge was an existing structure at the time this
standard was adopted. At that time, it is likely that the structural deficiencies in the bridge
were unknown and the need to replace the 1-5 bridge was unanticipated. Had it been
otherwise, ODOT believes this standard would have included a fourth exception to
authorize the bridge replacement, particularly given the critical importance of an 1-5
Willamette River bridge to a properly functioning interstate highway system and
provisions for that highway in the Metro Plan and TransPlan.
Because the 1-5 replacement bridges (I) are not designed solely for recreational use; (2)
would be elements of an interstate highway; and (3) are not being rebuilt due to a
disaster, this use management standard requires amending. Accordingly, ODOT requests
that the standard be amended to read as follows on page 155 of the Willamette Greenway
Section in the Willakenzie Area Plan Neighborhood Design Element, with [bracketed]
language indicating words being removed and underlininlZ indicating new text:
I. Provision that all new structures, expansion of existing structures,
drives, parking areas, or storage areas shall not be permitted within the
first 35 feet back from the top of the riverbank, unless the location of the
floodway boundary requires a greater separation. There are [three] four
exceptions to this standard:
A. Structures designed solely for recreational use...
B. Public improvements, including pedestrian and bicycle trails, public
plazas, and similar amenities, but excluding roads and parking areas, are
exempt from the setback requirements specified above.
C. Structures existing as of the date of adoption of this plan shall be
allowed to rebuilt at the same distance from the river that they were before
destruction by tire, flood, or other disaster.
D. Renlacement or exnansion of the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge and its
anDroaches.
Plan Amendment Request
\ 2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200S
36
Planner: BJ
~
~
This proposed amendment to the Willakenzie Area Plan allows the exceptions taken in
Section 2.4 of these findings to be implemented. In support of this amendment, ODOT
incorporates by reference herein the exceptions taken in Section 2.4, above23
2.6 Compliance with Statewide Planning Goals
Besides demonstrating compliance with the goal exception criteria, ODOT also must
demonstrate compliance with statewide planning goal requirements for which exceptions
are not being taken. The statewide planning goals relevant to the proposed Metro Plan
and Willakenzie Area Plan amendments are Goals 1,2,5,6,7,8,9, II, 12, 13, and IS.
Goal! (Citizen Involvement)
Goal I requires opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning
process. Generally, Goal I is satisfied when a local government follows the public
involvement procedures outlined in its acknowledged comprehensive plan and
development code. Here the applicable procedures are those in EC 9.970025 They
include public hearings before both the planning commissions and governing bodies of
Eugene, Springfield, and Lane, County. Compliance with these procedures results in
compliance with Goal I.
It should be noted that the federal environmental process applicable to this project
provides additional opportunity for citizen involvement. Citizen participation in that
process is fostered through public meetings, open houses, and newsletters, and through
opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment. That opportunity
will occur this winter, prior to or concurrent with the public hearings held on the plan
amendments requested herein.26
23 Without this amendment, the policy leads to a conflict with Statewide Planning Goal 12. This is because
(I) Goal 12 directs ODOT to prepare and adopt a state transportation system plan (TSP) that identifies a
system of transportation facilities and se,vices adequate to meet identified state transportation needs (OAR
660-0]2-0015(1)>; (2) the state TSP includes the 1-5 freeway, which includes an 1-5 bridge over the
Willamette River; and (3) OAR 660-012-00]5(2) and (3) require regional and local TSPs to be consistent
with the state TSP.
25 The City of Eugene can consider the proposed amendments to the Willakenzie Area Plan concurrently
with the proposed Goal 15 exceptions.
26 As part of the federal environmental process, ODOT established a Community Advisory Group (CAG)
composed of representatives of local neighbo,hood associations, parks departments (Eugene and
Willamalane), the Whilamut Natural Area, chambers of commerce, and the University of Oregon that has
been involved in the development of the project and will continue to be involved during selection of the
bridge type, its design, and construction. A CAG member is a voting membe, of the Project Development
Team (PDT), which is the primary decision body for the project. The lO-person PDT includes
representatives of Eugene, Springfield, Lane County, and the CAG.
i'..
" '
Date Received
FEB it 1 200S '
PI::InnAr' R:'I?'
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
~
Goal 2 (Land Use Planning), Part I
Goal 2, Part I requires that actions related to land use be consistent with acknowledged
comprehensive plans of cities and counties. The proposed amendments' consistency with
applicable unamended provisions in the Metro Plan, TransPlan, and Willakenzie Area
Plan is demonstrated in Section 2.7, below,
Goal 2 requires an adequate factual base for land use decision-making. The documents,
evidence, and testimony submitted in support of the requested plan amendments provide
an adequate factual base to support the proposed amendments.
Goal 2 further requires that plans be adopted and revised with opportunity for citizen
review and comment. As noted in the findings addressing Statewide Planning Goal I,
citizen participation is provided both as part of the federal environmental process and the
Oregon land use process.
Finally, Goal 2 requires that each plan and related implementation measures be
coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units. In no small measure, this
. inCludes coordinatiori with the Oregon' Transportation Commission's Oregon
Transportation Plan and Oregon Hjghway Plan, both of which identify and recognize the
importance of 1-5 as a major transportation route and major freight route through the
Eugene/Springfield region.
In developing the Environmental Assessment and preparing this application for plan
amendments, ODOT engaged in significant coordination efforts with local government
officials representing the cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County,
representatives of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and
the Federal Highway Administration, the WiIlamalane Parks and Recreation District, and
other agency and local officials. Provided the Willakenzie Area Plan is amended as set
out above to accommodate ODOrs need to replace the 1-5 Wjllamette River bridge, the
Metro Plan, TransPlan, and Willakenzie Area Plan will be coordinated with ODors
Oregon Highway Plan and the requirements of Goal 2, Part I will be met. 27
Goal 2 (Land Use Planning), Part II
Goal 2, Part II outlines the standards for goal exceptions. This goal requirement IS
satisfied for the reasons outlined in Section 2.4 of these findings and reasons.
Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands)
Goal 3 addresses Agricultural Lands. Goal 3 does not apply because the affected property
is inside im urban growth boundary.
27 As defined in ORS 197.015(6) in ,elevant part, a plan is "coordinated" when the need"Alt~V~<J1.Ce'IVed
governments have been conSIdered and accommodated as much as pOSSIble. ua t: n~
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 200S"
38
Planner: BJ
r-
'-'
Goal 4 (Forest Lands)
Goal 4 addresses Forest Lands. Goal 4 does not apply because the affected property is
inside an urban growth boundary.
GoalS (Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources)
Goal 5 requires local governments to adopt programs to protect natural resources and
conserve scenic, historic, and open space resources for present and future generations as
provided in LCDC's GoalS administrative rule, OAR 660, Division 23. Both Eugene and
Springfield have adopted land use regulations to protect significant natural resources
consistent with GoalS.
OAR 660-023-0090 regulates riparian corridors. As relevant to roadway projects, OAR
660-023-0090(8) authorizes local governments to adopt ordinances that protect
significant riparian corridors by preventing permanent alteration of the riparian area by
grading or by the placement of structures or impervious surfaces, except for certain
identified uses that are permitted "provided they are designed and constructed to
minimize intrusion into the riparian area." Those excepted uses include streets, roads, and
paths.
Construction of the replacement bridges and removal of the decommissioned and detour
bridges will impact riparian resources along the WiIlamette River. To protect these
resources, Springfield has established 75- foot riparian setbacks and Eugene has adopted a
Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone. In Springfield, development within the
riparian setback must satisfy Springfield Development Code (SDC) 31.240(2), which
authorizes public street crossings and bridges where they do not diminish riparian
functions. In Eugene, the proposed development must comply with the Overlay Zone
standards and the city's Standards Review process. See EC 9.4930(3)(b) and 9.8460
through 9.8474.
ODOT will apply for permits pursuant to these local regulations following approval of
the proposed plan amendments. As part of those permitting processes, the cities can and
will impose approval conditions aimed at avoidjng, minimizing, or mitigating impacts to
riparian areas to the extent practicable. These can include, but are not limited to,
conditions addressing construction management (e.g., site access, hours of operation,
noise, dust, vibration, lighting, hydrology, and bicycle/pedestrian safety in work areas);
habitat protection (to mitigate unavoidable impacts to affected natural resource areas
during and after bridge construction); and restoration of areas affected by bridge removal
(e.g., restoring vegetated areas to their original conditions, eliminating invasives,
monitoring, etc.),
Through compliance with such conditions, GoalS compliance is achieved. Further, the
connection between the purpose of Goal 5 and the purpose of Goal 15 greenway values
are mutually supportive and in many instances overlap. As such, through imp~tion of
and cO~~,I:;~~~~ with such conditions, the purposes of Goal 15 are met as well. uate Received
.-
/\-,:"?--',f:;
,. ' Plan' Am~ndment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 2008
Planner: BJ :
.~''''
;j-j
-
The Mill Race diversion dam is located approximately 300 feet upstream of the detour
bridge, outside the project area. The dam will not be affected by the project; however,
portions of structures associated with the dam are located within the project area and,
together with the dam, are eligible for listing on the National Register. Those portions
include concrete walls and revetments that directed water from the dam into the Mill
Race. These structures are in ruins, and it is no longer possible to understand how they fit
together. Under OAR 660-023-0200(7), local governments are not required to apply the
"economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences" analysis process to
determine a program to protect historic resources. Rather, they are encouraged to adopt
historic preservation regulations governing the demolition, removal, or major exterior
alteration of all designated historic resources. If the Mill Race is a designated historic
resource, Goal 5 compliance would be achieved through compliance with any such
regulations that Eugene and Springfield may have adopted.
Finally, ODOT established the Collaborative Environmental and Transportation
Agreement for Streamlining (CETAS) team in 2001 as a forum for review of major
transportation projects with state and federal resources agencies.28 CETAS reviewed this
project in February, 2006 and voted not to take it through the formal review process. The
individual agencies will still conduct all required environmental reviews arid approvals
(e.g., wetlands permits fill and removal permits). In addition, the project team made at
least two presentations to the Programmatic Agreements Reporting and Implementation
Team (PARJT), which was established for the Oregon Transportation Investment Act
(OTIA) III Bridge Program. PARJT includes most ofthe same agencies that are members
of CETAS. ODOT met with PARJT early in the federal environmental process to get its
input on issues and resources and feedback on some preliminary design concepts.
Goal 6 (Air, Water and Land Resources Quality)
Goal 6 addresses the quality of air, water, and land resources. In the context of
comprehensive plan amendments, a local government complies with Goal 6 by
explaining why it is reasonable to expect that the proposed uses authorized by the plan
amendment will be able to satisfy applicable federal and state environmental standards,
including air and water quality standards?9
The replacement bridges should have no adverse impact on air quality because they
merely replace an existing facility that has been decommissioned as being structurally
unsafe. The new bridges do not, in themselves, increase the highway capacity of 1-5, and
their construction will not, in itself, result in more people driving on 1-5. Instead, existing
traffic volumes will be shifted from the detour bridge to the new bridges. If the
28 CET AS members include O'egon Department of State Lands, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Department of Land Conservation and Development, Oregon State Historic P,eservation Office, US
Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US National Marine Fisheries Service,
O'egon Department of Environmental Quality, US Anny Corps of Enginee,s, FHW A, and ODOT
29 Applicable standards include those in the federal Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act and their
implementing ,egulations. Applicable state standards include those in the Oregon Wetland Removal/Fill
Act and ','n Department of Environmental Quality administrative rules governing air, wa~:l~~:,......w
quahty. ~~
Plan Amendment Request
: 2/0 1/2008
-FEBt 0 14'&00S
~..r
Plaf,lJ;l~[: B~ ,.~:".
,-
r-
~
decommissioned 1-5 bridge is not replaced, tens of thousands of vehicles would be forced
each day onto city streets and county roads not designed for such trips. The ensuing
degradation to the air quality along these alternative routes caused by unmanageable
congestion would be in direct contradiction to the purpose of Goal 6. The goal is met by
the proposed plan amendments. .
Construction of the replacement bridges and the removal of the decommissioned and
detour bridges will impact water quality by affecting soils and vegetation within the
Willamette River and along the greenway setback. Water quality may also be affected
where impervious surfaces are added along the bridge approaches. Where areas are
paved, water cannot penetrate the soils so it rushes over the surface. This can increase
erosion and the movement of fine sediments and increase pollutant loads in watercourses.
While construction of the replacement bridges will result in some new impervious
surfaces, overall the project will result in a net decrease in impervious surface because
ODOT will remove the approach roadway for the detour bridge,
Water quality impacts can adequately be mitigated through the use of effective land-
based stormwater treatment systems that include measures to preserve and restore mature
vegetation and maximize infiltration. The use of construction techniques that include
temporary and permanent Best Management Practices for erosion and sedjment control
and spill control and prevention also can achieve compliance with clean water standards.
Oregon Highway Plan SA. 1 directs ODOT to implement Best Management Practices.
Through the local permitting process, Eugene and Springfield can impose appropriate
conditions to ensure that Best Management Practices are employed and that water quality
is maintained consistent with federal and state standards. By doing so, Goal 6 is
satisfied.3o
Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Because the permanent replacement bridges would
create no new traffic on 1-5, but merely allow existing traffic to shift from the detour
bridge onto the new bridges, any difference in noise levels to adjacent residences would
be minor. However, noise impacts will exist, and noise walls are recommended as
mitigation.
Goal 7 (Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards)
Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards, which LCDC amended on June
I, 2002, addresses hazards to development. As amended, the goal requires DLCD to
review new hazard inventory information provided by federal or state agencies in
consultation with affected state and local government representatives. Thereafter, DLCD
will notify the local governments if the new hazard information requires a local response.
If it does, local governments must (I) evaluate the risk to people and property based on
the new information and other factors (including the frequency, severity, and location of
30 There is no storm water treatment for the decommissioned and detour bridges, Providing treatment would
have a beneficial effect on wate, quality. The wate, quality report for the project noted that the amount of
runoff from the b,idges would be so minor relative to the volume of flow in the WiIlamelle River that the
., effect would be negligible.
Plan Amendment Request
. 2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 041 2008
PI~H.H.":~'I". Q i
~
the hazard, its future effects on existing and future development, and the potential for
development in the hazard area to increase the frequency and severity of the hazard); (2)
allow opportunity for citizen review and comment on the inventory information and
results of the evaluation; and (3) adopt or amend, as necessary, plan policies and
implementation measures consistent with the principles of (a) avoiding development in
hazard areas where the risk to people and property cannot be mitigated; and (b)
prohibiting the siting of essential facilities in identified hazard areas "where the risk to
public safety cannot be mitigated unless an essential facility is needed within a hazard
area in order to provide essential emergency response services in a timely manner."
Since the amendments to Goal 7 took effect, DLCD has taken no action that, in turn,
would require Eugene, Springfield, or Lane County to set in motion the procedures in
Goal 7.31 Accordingly, the proposed amendments comply with Goal 7. It is noted that the
project will occur within the flood way and floodplain of the Willamette River, and that
both Eugene and Springfield have adopted ordinances regulating construction within
floodplains and floodways. By obtaining permits under these ordjnances, the project will
comply with Goal 7.
GoalS (Recreational Needs)
Goal 8 provides for local governments to meet the recreational needs of the citizens of
Oregon. East Alton Baker Park is located both to the east and Alton Baker Park to the
west of ODors 1-5 right-of-way. That right-of-way is not part of the park.
Consequently, demolition of the decommissioned and detour bridges and construction of
the replacement bridges will not remove or increase recreational opportunities at the park.
Removal of the detour bridges, however, will include removal of fill material from and
rehabilitation of an area of East Alton Baker Park that borders 1-5. Use of the park
property was granted to ODOT through a temporary easement from Willamalane Parks
and Recreation District. The easement requires ODOT to remove the detour bridges and
restore the property within 5 years of the completion of the permanent replacement
bridge. The bridges serve through-movement on 1-5 and have never provided access to
the park,
As noted earlier, the decommissioned bridge predates the adoption of the statewide
planning goals. As replacement bridges to the decommissioned bridge, the two new
bridges will not alter the nature of impacts to the park's recreational use. The park may
be temporarily affected during construction of the new bridges and demolition of the
decommissioned and detour bridges, but through the permitting process, mitigation
measures can be imposed to minimize adverse impacts. Such measures may include a
construction management plan that preserves and protects bicycle and pedestrian safety
during construction of the new bridges and demolition of the decommissioned bridge and
detour bridge. They might also include conditions to protect boater safety while bridge
construction/demolition is underway, and conditions to maintain consistency with
operational provisions in the East Alton Baker Park Plan. Through compliance with such
-..,....
3,' ,0,' clober 3, 2007 telephone conversation with Chris Shirley, OLCO Natural Haza,ds and FI'\"Ii!l'l~s R e'ved
Sp~cialist UaLe ec I
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
FEB 0 1 200S
42
Planner:'~~J
~.; '.,
'"..',l..
o
o
conditions, Goal 8 can be satisfied. Because the Park Plan incorporates lands with the
Willamette River greenway and helps to implement greenway values, Goal 8 compliance
also furthers consistency with Goal 15.
Goal 9 (Economic Development)
Goal 9 requires local governments to adopt comprehensive plans and policies that
"contribute to a stable and healthy economy in all regions of the state." The comprehensive
plans of Lane County and the cities of Eugene and Springfield have each been
acknowledged to comply with Goal 9. Those plans all acknowledge the importance of
efficient freight movement, and they recognize 1-5 as an interstate freeway serving traffic
moving through the region.
The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project will have very positive long-term economic
impacts to areas that are subject to Goal 9 because it will enable the continued use of the 1-5
corridor for the efficient movement of people and goods up and down the west coast and
through the region. In so doing, the project will contribute substantially to a stable and
healthy economy. It is noted as well that the project will not affect commercial or industrial
'land inventories' or limit access or other services to 'such' sites. For these reasons, the
proposed amendments are consistent with Goal 9.32
Goal 10 (Housing)
GoallQ addresses Housing. Goal 10 does not apply because the project will not affect lands
designated and zoned for residential development.
Goal 11 (Public Facilities and Services)
Goal 1 I requires local governments to plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient
arrangement of public facilities and services. The goal provides that urban and rural
development "be guided and supported by types and levels of services appropriate for, but
limited to, the needs and requirements of the urban, urbanizable and rural areas to be
served." The Public Facilities Planning Rule, OAR 660, Division I I, implements Goal I I.
Transportation facilities are identified as public facilities and services in Goal I I.
Because 1-5 provides a level of highway service identified in the Oregon Highway Plan
as necessary to meet state and regional travel needs, and because the decommissioned
bridge must be replaced to allow 1-5 to continue meeting future travel needs, the project
complies with Goal I 1. The replacement bridges will provide a level of service
appropriate to meet the needs and requirements of interstate, through and regional
travelers.
'-:';"
32 The project has an estimated construction cosl of $150 million. Because the aT/A III program places an
~mphasis on'using local subcontraclors and material suppliers, a substantial portion of the cost wil~ sQ.ent R . d
in 4 year period. UaLe ecelve
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
FEB 0 1 200S
43
Planner: BJ
-,
!:J
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that
is otherwise projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance
standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
The replacement bridges would merely replace an existing facility that has been
decommissioned as being structurally unsafe. The new bridges do not, in themselves,
increase the highway capacity of 1-5, and their construction will not, in itself, result in
more people driving on 1-5. Instead, existing traffic volum~s will be shifted from the
detour bridge to the new bridges. 1-5, including the replacement bridges, would retain its
current functional classification. The project would therefore not alter the performance of
1-5.
OAR 660-012-0015 (Preparation and Coordination of Transportation System Plans)
OAR 660-012-0015(1) directs ODOT to prepare and adopt a state transportation system
plan that identifies a system of transportation facilities and services adequate to meet
identified state transportation needs. The Oregon Transportation Commission has done
that through adoption of the Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) and modal plans,
including the Oregon Highway Plan. The OTP includes policies to increase the efficient
movement of people and goods for commerce and production of goods and services that
is coordinated with regional and local plans. It emphasizes managing the existing
transportation system effectively and improving that system before adding new facilities.
The OTP also promotes a safe, efficient, and reliable freight system to support economic
vitality. The OHP identifies 1-5 as an interstate highway within the state's roadway
network. That highway necessarily includes a bridge over the Willamette River in
Eugene/Springfield. OAR 660-012-0015(2) and (3) require that regional and local TSPs
be consistent with the state TSP. TransPlan currently recognizes the importance of 1-5 to
the region. Because the replacement bridges are necessary to maintaining 1-5, by
approving the proposed Metro Plan and Willakenzie Area Plan amendments, all plans
will remain consistent and the requirements of Goal 12 will be satisfied.34
Goal 13 (Energy Conservation)
Goal 13 directs cities and counties to manage and control land and uses developed on the
land to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based on sound economic
principles. While highway improvements are not generally synonymous with the notion
of energy conservation, Goal 13 does not prohibit improvements to existing highways.
Indeed, such an interpretation would conflict with provisions in Goal 12 and the TPR
authorizing highway facilities and improvements as part of an overall multimodal
transportation plan.
The replacement bridges are required because the decommissioned bridge is structurally
unsafe and the temporary detour bridge was not constructed using techniques that meet
34 The 1-5 WilIamette River Bridge Replacement Project is in both the 2006-2009 and 2008-201 1 MTIP
and, as such, is included automatically in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) update. It ii-\dentified in .
the2006MTIP as "Bundle 220," uate Recelvp-d
Plan Amendment Request
2/0 1/2008
FEB Y61 2008
Planner: aJ
~.
o
r"'\
, ,
,
current seismic standards or accommodate heavy traffic loads over the long term. The
replacement bridges will permit statewide and regional traffic to continue to move
through the region in an efficient manner. Without these bridges, tens of thousands of
vehicles would be forced onto local streets and bridges each day to negotiate crossing the
Willamette River. This would greatly increase traffic and congestion within the Eugene-
Springfield metropolitan area. Increased traffic congestion and out-of-direction travel
would waste rather than conserve fuel. By providing safe and convenient travel through
the area and facilitating the efficient movement of people, goods, and services, this
project conserves fuel, consistent with Goall3.
Goal 14 (Urbanization)
Goal 14 addresses Urbanization. Goal 14 does not apply because the project does' not
amend an urban growth boundary or convert urbanizable land to urban land.
Goal 15 (Willamette River Greenway)
Compliance with Goal 15 is addressed above in Sections 2.3 and 2.4 of these findings
arid in the findings addressing Goals 5 and 8. As noted, it is uncertain that a Goal 15
exception is required because the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge is an existing urban use. If
an exception is required, it is justified for the reasons outlined in Section 2.4.
Goal 16 (Estuarine Resources)
Goal 16 addresses Estuarine Resources. Because this application does not affect
estuarine resources, Goal 16 is not applicable.
Goal 17 (Coastal Shorelands)
Goal 17 addresses Coastal Shorelands. Because this application does not affect coastal
shore lands, Goal 17 is not applicable.
Goal 18 (Beaches and Dunes)
Goal 18 addresses Beaches and Dunes in coastal areas. Because this application does not
affect beaches and dunes in coastal areas, Goal 18 is not applicable,
Goal 19 (Ocean Resources)
Goal 19 addresses Ocean Resources.
resources, Goal 19 is not applicable.
Because this application does not affect ocean
.".....
Date Received
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
i='C~ 1M 7008
Plann'
.;.f,
"'J'
.0
,....)
'--.J
within the Willamette River Greenway Setback Line the addition and removal of
fill within ODOT right-of-way and the removal of fill within a temporary slope
easement east of 1-5. This exception satisfies the criteria of Oregon
Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-004-0022(6), Willamette Greenway, and the
exception requirements of OAR 660-004-0020 Goal 2 Part lI(c) for a "reasons"
exception, and pursuant to OAR 660-004-0015, is hereby adopted as an
amendment to the Metro Plan text, Policy #11, Chapter III, Section D.
Environmental Design Element
Policy E.2: Natural vegetation, natural water features, and drainage-ways shall be
protected and retained to the maximum extent practical. Landscaping shall be utilized to
enhance those natural features. This policy does not preclude increasing their
conveyance capacity in an environmentally responsible manner,
Bridge construction and demolition, including construction and removal of associated
temporary work platforms, will impact riparian vegetation within the greenway. Through
the permitting process, these impacts can and will be minimized, to the extent practicable,
and mitigated, with all areas disturbed by the project returned to conditions at least as
good as they were before the project. Protection to natural riparian areas will be
maintained to the greatest extent practicable.
The project also must obtain local permits from Eugene and Springfield pursuant to land
use regulations that were adopted to protect the Willamette River Greenway and
significant natural resources pursuant to Statewide Planning Goals 15 and 5 and protect
water quality consistent with Goal 6. The natural vegetation riparian fringe along the
Willamette River can and will be protected through compliance with the permitting
requirements contained in the Eugene Code for proposed development in the greenway
and in areas subject to Statewide GoalS. The City of Eugene can impose approval
conditions as it deems necessary to protect riparian vegetation to the extent practicable.
Protection to fish and wildlife habitat will be maintained to the greatest extent
practicable. Significant fish and wildlife habitats can and will be protected through
compliance with the permitting requirements contained in the Eugene and Springfield
development codes for developments in the greenway and in areas subject to Statewide
GoalS. The cities of Eugene and Springfield can impose approval conditions as they
deem necessary to protect fish and wildlife habitats to the extent practicable.
Construction best management practices will be implemented to minimize the effects of
construction activities. Disturbed areas will be restored and ODOT will work with the
community throughout the design and construction process to get input and advice on
ways to avoid and minimize environmental impacts.
The project would meet the OTlA III Environmental Performance Standards (EPS) in
order to meet the requirements of the programmatic environmental permits that apply to
the statewide bridge program. These performance standards define the level ofE7atEf'Recei1/ed
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
FEB 0 1 2008
50
Planner: BJ
--
a project may have upon the environment, thereby limiting or avoiding impacts to the
environment through the use of proper planning, design, and construction activities.
To avoid fish and wildlife species and minimize temporary impacts from construction
activities, all applicable aTIA III State Bridge Delivery Program EPS will be
implemented to reduce the extent of direct and indirect impacts to fish and wildlife
species. Effects to water resources during construction and operation of the project will
be minimized through the implementation of applicable mitigation measures in the aTIA
III State Bridge Delivery Program EPS.
aD aT will coordinate with aDFW through the design process to identify opportunitjes
to minimize habitat disturbance. To avoid and minimize potential impacts to fish and
wildlife species habitat during and after construction activities, all applicable aTIA III
State Bridge Delivery Program EPS will be implemented to reduce the extent of direct
and indirect impacts to habitat. These include:
o Minimize effects to natural stream and floodplain by keeping the work area to the
smallest footprint needed.
o Prepare and implement a plan to prevent construction debris from dropping into .
the WilIamette River and to remove materials that may drop with a minimum
disturbance to aquatic habitat.
o Prepare site restoration plans for upland, wetland, and streambank areas to include
native plant species and noxious weed abatement techniques, and use large wood
and rock as components of streambed protection treatments.
o Flag boundaries of clearing limits and sensitive areas to be avoided during
construction.
o Coordinate with Willamalane Park and Recreation District and the Eugene Parks
and Open Space Division regarding sensitive areas in Alton Baker Park and the
Whilamut Natural Area that should be avoided during construction.
o Restore and revegetate disturbed areas.
Policy E. 4: Public and private facilities shall be designed and located in a manner that
preserves and enhances desirable features of local and neighborhood areas and
promotes their sense of identity.
The replacement bridges will be located within the same aDaT right-of-way where the
decommissioned bridge is located. Impacted riparian areas and other lands within the
greenway setback can be protected during the permitting process through the imposition
of approval conditions.
~.
Bridge design can be considered during the plan amendment process or, for Springfield,
through the Discretionary Use Approval process as provided in SDC 25.050 and 10.030.
Conceptual designs will be addressed as part of the federaj draft environmental process
that precedes local land use decision-making. As noted above in the discussion of
,Stat~wi~~ Planning Goal I, the public is involved in this process. Among other things,
aDaT established a Community Advisory Group (CAG) composed of representatives of
Date ReceivecOate Received
FEB 0 1 200S FCii (J 157nnR
PI::Innor" R Ir.' ',,,.,,,,
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
'"
-:\ ~
,.,!..~.4.)
,
local neighborhood aSSOCiatIons, parks departments (Eugene and WiIlamalane), the
Citizen Planning Committee for the Whilamut Natural Area, chambers of commerce, and
the University of Oregon that has been involved in the development of the project and
will continue to be involved during selection of the bridge type, its design, and
construction.
Transportation Element
Goal I: Provide an integrated transportation and land use system that supports choices
in modes of travel and development patterns that will reduce reliance on the automobile
and enhance livability, economic opportunity, and the quality of life.
Goal 2: Enhance the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area's quality of life and economic
opportunity by providing a transportation system that is:
. Balanced
. Accessible
· Efficient
. Safe
. Interconnected
. Environmentally responsible
. Supportive of responsible and sustainable development
. Responsive to community needs and neighborhood impacts
o Economically viable and financially stable
The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge is an existing facility in TransPlan and the OHP. As
such, through TransPlan's acknowledgment, it has already been deemed consistent with
Transportation Goals 1 and 2. While 1-5 is a freeway and, as such, is automobile oriented,
the mobility and accessibility it provides do help to enhance regional livability, economic
opportunity, and the quality ofljfe in the region,
The bridge replacement project maintains consistency with Goals 1 and 2. Due to
structural damage that rendered it unsafe and which cannot be repaired, the original 1-5
bridge was decommissioned and must be replaced. The project replaces the original
bridge with two new permanent bridges. Replacing a structurally deficient and unsafe
bridge, rather than directing 1-5 traffic onto local streets, maintains regional mobility and
livability and enhances economic opportunity and quality of life. It ensures the
continuation of an accessible, efficient, and interconnected transportation network by
allowing continued use of 1-5 over the WiIlamette River, thus maintaining the principal
roadway connection between the north and south portions of Eugene and Springfield.
Through the permitting process, measures can and will be provided to ensure
construction of the replacement bridges occurs in an environmentally responsible
manner.
"""
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
Planner: t~J
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
~
"
Transportation System Improvements: System-Wide Policies
F 10: Protect and manage existing and future transportation infrastructure.
The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge Project replaces a structurally deficient bridge with two
new permanent bridges built to accommodate anticipated traffic volumes and weight
loads. This bridge replacement reflects an effort to manage and protect 1-5, which is an
essential part of the region's and state's existing transportation infrastructure.
Transportation System Improvements: Roadways
Policy F14: Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transportation users,
bicyclists, pedestrians, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and
constructing roadway system improvements.
1-5 across the Willamette River is an exjsting transportation facility identified in
TransPlan and the OHP. Because the original 1-5 bridge is structurally deficient and had
to be decommissioned, a new permanent bridge is needed to address the safety and
mobility needs of motorists arid facilitate efficient movement of emergency vehicles
between the north and south sections of Eugene and Springfield, The new permanent
replacement bridges can and will be designed to meet applicable state and federal safety
and mobility standards. The temporary detour bridge cannot accommodate the safety
needs of motorists because it does not meet current seismic standards and the
construction methods used to build it only met environmental requirements as they
applied to temporary, not permanent, structures.
Policy F15: Motor vehicle level of service policy:
a) Use motor vehicle level of service standards to maintain acceptable and reliable
performance on the roadway system. These standards shall be usedfor:
(1) Identifying capacity deficiencies on the roadway system.
(2) Evaluating the impacts on roadways of amendments to transportation
plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans and land-use regulations,
pursuant to the TPR (OAR 660-012-0060).
(3) Evaluating development applications for consistency with the land-use
regulations of the applicable local government jurisdiction.
b) Acceptable and reliable performance is defined by the following levels of service
under peak hour traffic conditions: LOS E within Eugene's Central Area
Transportation Study (CATS) area and LOS D elsewhere,
c) Performance standards from the ORP shall be applied on state facilities in the
Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area,
.' . t,: ~
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200S
53
r._ c. -, ~. .
Plan Aniendniehi'Request
2/01/2008
PlaAner: BJ..-
. ,
The 1-5 Willamette River replacement bridges will be striped to provide two travel lanes
in each direction, consistent with current striping patterns, The bridge will be built to
accommodate future restriping to three travel lanes in each direction when the adjacent
sections of 1-5 are widened to three lanes in each direction. TransPlan projects 150 and
260 provide for the future widening of 1-5 from four to six travel lanes north and south of
the Willamette River.
Because the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge is already recognized in TransPlan, there is no
need to amend the plan. The required exceptions are not taken to meet requirements of
Statewide Planning Goal 12 or the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), but to comply
with Willamette River greenway requirements in Goal 15 and the Metro Plan. These
findings address the consistency of the needed plan amendments with applicable Metro
Plan requirements and land use regulations. Other applicable land use regulations will be
addressed during the local permitting processes.
F16: Promote or develop a regional roadway system that meets the combined needs jor
travel through, within and outside the region.
1-5 is a state facility that' serves both statewide and regional transportation needs as
defined in the TPR, i.e., needs for movement of people and goods (I) between and
through regions of the state and between states (state need), and (2) between and through
communities and accessibility to regional destinations within a metropolitan area
(regional need). As such, it is an integral element of the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan
area's regional roadway system. Indeed, it is likely the principal arterial serving the
combined needs for travel through, within, and outsjde the region. Replacing a
structurally deficient bridge with two new bridges promotes the maintenance and
continuation of the regional roadway system serving the combined needs for travel
through, within, and outside the region.
Transportation System Improvements: Goods Movement
F29,' Support reasonable and reliable travel times for freight/goods movement in the
Eugene-Springfield region.
Connecting 1-5 north and south of the WiIlamette River via a new, structurally safe
bridge crossing is essential to ensuring that reasonable and reliable travel times for
moving freight and goods in the region are maintained. Without the connection, tens of
thousands of vehicles daily would be required to seek alternative means for crossing the
river, clogging capacity and causing congestion and delay throughout Eugene and
Springfield. Existing roadways lack sufficient capacity to accommodate the existing
49,000 daily vehicle trips or the 73,000 daily vehicle trips anticipated on the 1-5
Willamette River Bridge by 2030.
Date Received
FEB 0 1 2008
Plan Amendment Request
-,2/01/2008
Planner: BJ
54
~
'.
Finance
F34: Operate and maintain transportation facilities in a way that reduces the need for
more expensive future repair,
A permanent replacement for the decommissioned bridge is necessary to improve safety
and ensure mobility of all users of 1-5 in the Eugene/Springfield area. Replacing the
unsafe decommissioned bridge and substandard detour bridge with a permanent bridge
that meets current safety and design standards and that handles increasing traffic volumes
will result in the continued operation of 1-5 and will eliminate the potential for a more
costly, expedited future repair to ensure continued mobility.
Citizen Involvement Element
Goal: Continue to develop, maintain, and refine programs and procedures that maximize
the opportunity for meaningful, ongoing citizen involvement in the community's planning
and planning implementation processes consistent with mandatory statewide planning
standards,
Citizens have the opportunity to be involved in the 1-5 Willamette River Bridge
Replacement Project through participation in the federal environmental process and
through the local land use decision-making process, including opportunity to comment at
public hearings on the applications for the current plan amendments. Citizen involvement
will continue through the design and construction of the replacement bridges. Citizen
involvement that has occurred to date is discussed in greater detail above in the findings
addressing Statewide Planning Goal I,
b. TransPlan
Many of the relevant goals, objectives, and policies in TransPlan are repetitive of those in
the Transportation Element of the Metro Plan. Where this is so, reference is made back to
the analysis of the corresponding provision in the Metro Plan. Like many of the policies
in TransPlan, many of these goals, objectives, and policies are directive to the city or
encourage or support a specified outcome. While these are not mandatory review
standards for this reason, they are addressed herein nonetheless.
As with the Metro Plan, a number of the TransPlan goals, objectives, or policies touch
this project only tangentially, if at all. Because they do not directly apply, these goals,
objectives, and policies are not addressed herein.
Goal #1: Provide an integrated transportation and land use system that supports choices
in modes of travel and development patterns that will reduce reliance on the automobile
and enhance livability, economic opportunity, and the quality of life,
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200S
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
Planner: BJ
-, l~i>.
, ,
,
:
Goal #2: Enhance the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area's quality of life and
economic opportunity by providing a transportation system that is:
.
Balanced,
Accessible,
Efficient,
Safe,
Interconnected,
Environmentally responsible,
Supportive of responsible and sustainable development,
Responsive to community needs and neighborhood impacts, and
Economically viable and financially stable.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
TransPlan Goals 1 and 2 are virtually identical to the Metro Plan Transportation Elements
Goals I and 2. The project satisfies these goals for the same reasons these Metro Plan
goals are satisfied.
Objective #1: Provide adequate levels of accessibility and mobility for the efficient
movement of people, goods and services within the region.
The OHP identifies 1-5 as a facility needed to serve statewide transportation needs,
including the movement of freight through the region and the state. A safe 1-5 bridge
crossing over the Willamette River is integral to moving people, goods, and services
efficiently within and through the region,
Objective #2: Improve transportation system safety through design, operations and
maintenance, system improvements, support facilities, public information, and law
enforcement efforts.
The original 1-5 Willamette River Bridge was structurally damaged and had to be
decommissioned for safety reasons. The new bridges will be designed to meet all
required safety standards and thus will improve transportation system safety.
Objective #3. Provide transportation systems that are environmentally responsible.
Through application of the NEPA and its implementing regulations, the bridge
replacement project must meet federal environment standards. This will involve
strategies to avoid or minimjze impacts where practicable and mitigate unavoidable
adverse environmental impacts.36 The project also must obtain local permits from
Eugene and Springfield pursuant to land use regulations that were adopted to protect the
Willamette River greenway and significant natural resources pursuant to Statewide
Planning Goals 15 and 5; regulate construction in hazard areas pursuant to Goal 7; and
protect air and water quality consistent with Goal 6, .
Date Received
36 Mitigation is generally a condition of state and federal environmental permits when unavoidableJ'W\c~GOB
WIll occur. ' H:,K
,,'........,-,
Plan Amendment.Request
2/01/2008 . -
r"~nnier" ~J
. . "5'/;' U
"r
"
Objective #4: Support transportation strategies that improve the economic vitality of the
region and enhance economic opportunity.
This objective is met for the reasons noted under Goal 9 compliance, A safe, properly
functioning bridge serving interstate traffic over the WiIlamette River is essential to
efficiently moving goods and services, which in turn enhances economic opportunity and
improves regional economic vitality.
Objective #5: Provide citizens with information to increase their awareness of
transportation issues, encourage their involvement in resolving the issues, and assist
them in making informed transportation choices,
The 1-5 WiIlamette River Bridge Replacement Project involves citizens through both the
federal environmental process and the local land use decision-making process. In each,
citizens have the opportunity to review background materials and be heard in the publjc
hearing process. Citizen involvement opportunities are discussed above in more detail in
the analysis of compliance with Statewide Planning Goal I.
Objective #6: Coordinate among agencies to facilitate efficient planning, design,
operation, and maintenance of transportation facilities and programs,
Among others, this application has involved coordination among the Oregon Department
of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, Lane County, the cities of
Eugene and Springfield, and affected state and federal environmental agencies.
Coordination efforts are described above in more detail in the analysis of compliance
with Statewide Planning Goal 2, Part I.
TSI System-Wide Policies
Policy #1: Protect and manage existing andfuture transportation infrastructure.
The original 1-5 Willamette River Bridge was decommissioned upon the opening of the
detour bridge following determination that it was structurally unsafe. Replacing that
bridge with new bridges that meet applicable safety standards protects and properly
manages the 1-5 system.
TSI Roadway Policies
Policy #1: Address the mobility and safety needs o/motorists, transit users, bicyclists,
pedestrians, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing
roadway system improvements.
This policy is satisfied for the same reasons that the application complies with Metro Plan
Transportation Element Policy F.14.
" "Ii'
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200S 57
Planner: BJ
h
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
)'
Policy #2: Use motor vehicle level of service standards to maintain acceptable and
reliable performance on the roadway system. These standards shall be usedfor:
(1) IdentifYing capacity deficiencies on the roadway system.
(2) Evaluating the impacts on roadways of amendments to transportation plans,
acknowledged comprehensive plans and land-use regulations, pursuant to the
TPR (OAR 660-012-0060).
(3) Evaluating development applications for consistency with the land-use
regulations of the applicable local government jurisdiction.
Performance standards from the Oregon Highway Plan shall be applied on state facilities
in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area.
This policy is satisfied for the same reasons that the application complies with Metro Plan
Transportation Element Policy F .15.
Policy #3: In conjunction with the overall transportation system, recognizing the needs
of other transportation modes, promote or develop a regional roadway system that meets
combined needs for travel through, within, and outside the region.
This policy is satisfied for the same reasons that the application complies with Metro Plan
Transportation Element Policy F.16.
TSI Goods Movement Policies
Policy #1: Support reasonable and reliable travel times for freight/goods movement in
the Eugene-Springfield region.
This policy is satisfied for the same reasons that the application complies with Metro Plan
Transportation Element Policy F.29.
c. WilIakenzie Area Plan
Several provisions in the Willakenzie Area Plan are relevant to this application. These
criteria are found in the Land Use Element, Transportation Element, and Neighborhood
Design Element. The application is consistent with these criteria for the reasons outlined
below.
As discussed in Section 2.5, above, the application is not consistent with Use
Management Standard I of the Neighborhood Design Element, Willamette Greenway
Development Criteria, because as written, this provision does not allow the bridge
replacement to go forward. Accordingly, ODOT has requested that Use Management
Standard 1 be amended. Besides ensuring that the Willakenzie Area Plan maintains
consistency with the Metro Plan and TransPlan, the requested amendment would be
consistent .with both the Land Use and Transportation elements of th",Willakwie Area d
Plan for reasons stated below. Uale neCelVe
FEB 0 1 200S
58
Planner: BJ
Plan' Amendment Request
2/01/2008
, '<'
"
.
Land Use Element: Land Use Policies and Proposed Actions
Policy 1: The City shall use the Land Use Diagram and accompanying text and policies
of the Willakenzie Refinement Plan, as well as other applicable City goals, policies, and
plans, to provide policy direction for public decisions affecting the plan area.
The City is reviewing this application for compliance with relevant provisions of the
Metro Plan, TransPlan, and Willakenzie Area Plan. Diagrams in the Willakenzie Plan
identify 1-5 as a major arterial. See the transportation functional classification map on
page 84, which shows an 1-5 bridge over the Willamette River. This application is
consistent with that provision.
Policy 3: Retain existing significant vegetation whenever possible to provide buffering
between residential and nonresidential uses, as well as between low-density and higher
density residential uses.
The project will result in the temporary removal of some existing vegetation buffering
residential areas from 1-5. The vegetation removed will be limited to the miniminn area
necessary for construction and staging activities. Following construction, cleared areas
will be revegetated and returned to existing conditions to the extent practicable.
Policy 4: Recognize Coburg Road, the Ferry Street Bridge, Beltline Road, Delta
Highway, 1-5, and the Eugene-Springfield Highway (1-105) as designated entrance
corridors to the city as identified in the adopted City of Eugene Entrance Beautification
Study.
This policy recognizes 1-5 as an entrance corridor. Replacing the decommissioned 1-5
WiIlamette River Bridge is consistent with that categorization and, for all practical
purposes, necessary for 1-5 to retain this designation.
Transportation Element
Policy 1: The transportation network within the Willakenzie area shall be planned and
designed to ensure: a) preservation of existing neighborhoods; b) an adequate system of
arterials and collectors for the efficient movement of through traffic; and c) the
preservation of the use of local streets for local traffic.
The functional classification map identifies 1-5 (including a bridge over the Willamette
River) as a major arterial. 1-5 cannot adequately provide for the efficient movement of
traffic through the Willakenzie area without replacing the unsafe, structurally deficient
decommissioned bridge with a new river crossing. The amendment to Neighborhood
Design Element Use Management Standard I (Willamette River Greenway), addressed in
Section 2,5 of these findings, is necessary to ensure continued compliance and maintain
plan consistency with Transportation Element Policy I,
"'
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200S
59/"'-
Planner: .8dE(~.
~,,~ ,'": (j
:,. ~- ."
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
",
-'
Policy 4: The City shall provide for improvements to designated entrance corridors,
including those in County and State jurisdictions, in conjunction with construction or
reconstruction projects affecting those streets.
The bridge crosses the Willamette River, a defining feature of Eugene-Springfield. The
project area also includes an important and highly used park with a designated natural
area (the Whilamut Natural Area) and unique cultural features. Further, the bridge is an
important symbolic gateway between Eugene and Springfield as well as for the
Willamette River valley. A key consideration of the project is providing an aesthetically
pleasing solution that recognizes the scenic beauty of the project area. Therefore, a range
of bridge types and pier options were considered. Selection of the bridge type for each
segment is dependent primarily on aesthetic considerations and budget. Additionally, the
reduction in the total number of piers and in the number of piers within the Willamette
River will greatly improve views of the river and, as such, contribute to a sjgnificant
positive visual impact.
Policy 4,1: As part of the design process, provide for the development of corridor design
plans that recognize the unique characteristics and individual identities of each of the
designated entrance corridors.
ODOT is developing the project to retain design flexibility related to bridge form,
materials, and aesthetic treatments as well as to allow flexibility to the engineers to
design an economical bridge that also meets community requirements. Selection of the
bridge type for each segment is dependent primarily on aesthetic considerations and
budget.
Policy 7: To the greatest extent possible, the City shall encourage regional and intercity
traffic to use major rather than minor arterials.
The Transportation Element functional classification map designates 1-5 as a major
arterial. The application to amend Use Management Standard I is fully consistent with
this policy because it provides for the continued use of 1-5 through the area to serve
through and regional traffic. Because the decommissioned bridge must be replaced for
safety reasons, this policy can only be satisfied by approving the requested goal
exceptions and Willakenzie Area Plan amendment.
Policy 8: The City shall work with developers and the State of Oregon to ensure that
noise allenuation is provided for existing and proposed residential developments along
State highways when improvements are made to those roads.
A project noise technical report was prepared as part of the EA to analyze potential noise
impacts resulting from the project. Per the ODOT Noise Manual (June 1996) analysis
procedures, noise mitigation measures were evaluated to reduce noise levels to nearby
residences as a result of the project. Noise walls were determined to meet the ODOT
effectiveness and cost-effectiveness criteria in two locations and were recommended as
--,;;,
Date Received
FEB 0 1 ~08
Planner: BJ
-.1:'-
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
~- -
'-
~
mitigation. The final wall locations will be determined after public input is completed as
part of the NEPA process.
Policy 8.1: At the request of residents, the City should work wilh residents and the State
to determine cost-effectiveness and cost distribution for sounds barriers along existing
freeways in the established neighborhoods where sound barriers are not currently
installed.
See response to Policy 8.
Policy 8,2: The City should work with the State to ensure local, State, and Federal
regulations pertaining to noise attenuation are met whenever a freeway is improved.
See response to Policy 8.
Neighborhood Design Element - WilIamette Greenway
Use Management Standard 1: See Section 2,5 above,
Use Managemenl Standard 2: Provision for public pedestrian and bicycle access along
the river.
Trails will, to the maximum extent practicable, be kept open, safe, and useable during
project construction. A continuous route across ODOT right-of-way for the
bicycle/pedestrian pathways would be maintained on both the north side and the south
side ofriver during construction. The project will not have a long-term effect on existing
bicycle/pedestrian access along the river.
Use Management Standard 5: Activities or uses such as open storage of materials shall
be discouraged within the greenway.
Two staging areas for material storage and stockpiling, equipment storage, job trailers,
employee parking, and other construction-related uses would be occupied during
construction; one on the north side of the river and one on the south. The currently-
proposed staging areas would be located on ODOT right-of-way, but would also require
the temporary occupancy of three parcels not currently owned by ODOT, including
portions of Alton Baker Park, within the greenway, adjacent to 1-5. ODOT would acqujre
temporary easements for use ofnon-ODOT property during construction.
Use Management Standard 7: Significant fish and wildlife habitats, as identified in the
adopted Natural Resources Special Study, or Metropolitan Plan Natural Assets and
Constraints Working Paper shall be protected. Sites subsequently determined by the
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife shall also be protected.
Significant fish and wildlife habitats can and will be protected through compliance with
the permitting requirements contained in the Eugene and Springfield development codes
fordevelopments in the greenway and in areas subject to Statewide Goal ba~ei1ieceived
Plan Amendment Request
'2/0112008
FEB 01;1200S
..._., .1'
(! '
Planner:' sJ;;"-';-'
Eugene and Springfield can impose approval conditions as they deem necessary to
protect fish and wildlife habitats to the extent practicable, consistent with the need to
provide a new 1-5 Willamette River crossing relevant to the Transportation Element
policies identified above.
ODOT will coordinate with ODFW through the design process to identify opportunities
to minimize habitat disturbance. To avoid and minimize potential impacts to fish and
wildlife species habitat during and after construction activities, all applicable OTIA III
State Bridge Delivery Program EPS will be implemented to reduce the extent of direct
and indirect impacts to habitat. These include:
o Minimize effects to natural stream and floodplain by keeping the work area to the
smallest footprint needed.
o Prepare and implement a plan to prevent construction debris from dropping into
the Willamette River and to remove materials that may drop with a minimum
disturbance to aquatic habitat.
o Prepare site restoration plans for upland, wetland, and streambank areas to include
native plant species and noxious weed abatement techniques, and use large wood
and rock as components of streambed protection treatments.
o Flag boundaries of clearing limits and sensitive areas to be avoided during
construction.
o Coordinate with Willamalane Park and Recreation District and the Eugene Parks
and Open Space Division regarding sensitive areas in Alton Baker Park and the
Whilamut Natural Area that should be avoided during construction.
o Restore and revegetate disturbed areas.
Use Management Standard 8: The natural vegetative riparian fringe along the
Willamette River, as identified on the Willakenzie Area Plan Natural Resource Area Map,
shall be protected and enhanced to the maximum extent practicable.
The riparian vegetation removed will be limited to the minimum area necessary for
construction and staging activities. Following construct jon, cleared areas will be
revegetated and returned to existing conditions to the extent practicable.
The natural vegetation riparian fringe along the Willamette River can and will be
protected through compliance with the permitting requirements contained in the Eugene
Code for proposed development in the greenway and in areas subject to Statewide Goal
5. The City of Eugene can impose approval conditions as it deems necessary to protect
riparian vegetation to the extent practicable, consistent with the need to provide a new 1-5
Willamette River crossing relevant to the Transportation Element policies identified
above.
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 20QS
Planner: BJ
~.",
'-
.c;:
Use Management Standard 9: Scenic qualities and viewpoints, as identified in the Metro
Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper shall be preserved.
The new replacement bridges will be located within ODOrs 1-5 right-of-way in
essentially the same location as the decommissioned bridge. As such, this project should
have no effect on scenic qualities and viewpoints.
Neighborhood Design Element - Waterways
Policy I: Significant wetland, riparian, water and upland sites in the Willakenzie area
shall be protected from encroachment and degradation in order to retain their important
functions related to fish and wildlife habitat, flood control, sedimentation and erosion
control, water-quality control, and groundwater pollution control.
Affected riparian areas and fish and wildlife habitat in the Willakenzie area can and will
be protected through compliance with the permitting requirements contained in the
Eugene development code for proposed development in the greenway and in areas.
subject to Statewide GoalS. The City of Eugene can impose approval conditions as it
deems necessary to protect these resources to the extent practicable, consistent with the
need to provide a new le5 Willamette River crossing relevant to the Transportation
Element policies identified above. Flood control, sedimentation and erosion control, and
water-quality and groundwater pollution control can be achieved through these same
permitting processes, through the issuance of permits to allow development in the
floodway or floodplain, and by requiring ODOT to construct the new bridges and
demolish the decommissioned and detour bridges using Best Management Practices.
d. Riverfront Park Study
Transportation
5. Required transportation projects will be phased and the phasing schedule will depend
upon the level of participation of non-public funds (i. e., participation by a developer) and
the level of actual development,
It is not expected that the project will be phased.
Environment
2, The existing Millrace which passes through a portion of the study area is an important
environmenlal and historic city feature, Development occurring in the Riverfront Park
shall maintain or improve the visual and bicycle/pedestrian access to and along the Mill
Race, expanding its use for public recreation while at the same time recognizing its role
as a storm runoff channel.
'. Plan Amendment Request
(2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 200S
(~...:.. ...;.
. / .
Planner:3 BJ "
K
./
3. Development occurring in the Riverfront Park area shall be designed to preserve a
significant cluster of black locust, English oak, and redleaf plum trees located just east of
the current location of the bicycle path.
4, Development in the Riverfront Park area shall, when possible, maintain and enhance
the public's physical access to the river and the riparian strip along its banks.
The new bridges would be constructed in about the same location as the decommissioned
and detour bridges. Though there would be a slight shift in the alignment of 1-5, all
improvements would remain within the existing OOOT right-of-way. The new bridges
therefore will not be located within the Riverfront Park Study area. However, portions of
the temporary work bridges may be located within a small portion of the Riverfront Park
Study area. OOOT would acquire temporary easements for use of non-OOOT property
during construction, The Riverfront Park Study area in which a portion of the temporary
work bridges may be located is just east of the 1-5 replacement bridges shown in Figure
3, south of the Willametle River, and north of Franklin Boulevard. This section of the
Riverfront Park Study area does not include the Millrace and cluster of trees mentioned in
the Riverfront Park Study Environmental Policies 2 and 3; therefore, these elements
would not be affected. Public access to the river and along the 'Millrace will not be
affected. See responses to GoalS and Metro Plan Policy E.2.
e. Laurel Hill Plan
6. The Laurel Hill Plan supports the South Hill Study standards. In general, alteration of
the land contours shall be minimized to retain views of natural features and retain as
much of the forested atmosphere as possible. Aside from purely aesthetic considerations,
these hillsides demand care in development because the topsoil is thin and the water
runoff is rapid. Proposed developments shall respect the above considerations. The
Valley hillside policy applies to all land with an average slope, from toe to crest, of 15
percent or greater, (A is-percent slope is one in which the land rises 15 feet per 100
horizontal feet.)
a. if, in the opinion of the responsible City official, an adverse conservation or geological
condition exists upon a parcel of land proposed for a subdivision, or before any major
hillside clearing, excavation, filling or construction is contemplated, the requirements of
the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, Excavation and Grading, and those sections of
the code relative to foundation design may be invoked.
b, Considerable latitude shall be allowed the developer in the shaping, depth, and
required street frontages of lots where it is necessary to preserve the terrain.
Project improvements would occur within the existing OOOT right-of-way. The
vegetation removed will be limited to the minimum area necessary for construction and
staging activities. Following construction, cleared areas will be revegetated and returned
to existing conditions to the extent practicable. Grading would be limited to minimum
Date Received
Plan Amendment Request FEB 0 1 200S
2/0112008 64
Planner: BJ
, -'
area necessary. Areas affected by construction activities would be restored following
construction.
f. South Hills Study
That adequate review of both on-site and off-site impact of any development by a
qualified engineering geologist occur under any of the following conditions:
1. Allformations
Soil depth of 40 inches and above
Slopes of 30 percent and above
2. Basaltjlows
Soil depth of 40 inches and above
Slopes of20 percent to 30 percent
3. Eugene Formation
Soil depth of 40 inches and above
Slopes of20 percent to 30 percent
4, Basalt jlows
Soil depth of 20 to 40 inches
Slopes of 30 percent and above
5. Eugene Formation
Soil depth of20 inches to 40 inches
Slopes of 30 percent and above
Land within the southern portion of the project area, within the South Hills Study area, is
below 500 feet in elevation. Project work within this area consists of roadway alignment.
Geological resources in the project area consist of fill material, alluvium, and bedrock.
The processes affecting these materials are anthropogenic, such as excavation and
grading, and natural, such as landslides, erosion, and earthquakes. The project would
have no permanent effects on geological resources. Based on the earthquake hazard,
geotechnical investigations should be completed prior to construction to determine the
best method to seat foundations, piers, and bents to reduce effects related to earthquakes
(e.g., lateral spread, liquefaction). In addition, slopes should he constructed in a manner
that reduces the potential for erosion or small landslides.
g. Entrance Beautification Study
1. identifY the most direct and attractive routes into the city, encourage their use, and
maintain and improve the character and quality of the entrance experience along these
routes.
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 20>>P
Planner: BJ
J
2. Design and implement improvements to Eugene's entrances which recognize the
diversity and identity of the areas in which the entrances are located.
3, Cooperate with other jurisdictions to make the most efficient use of available funds in
achieving beautification of Eugene's entrances.
4. When evaluating designs for entrance beautification projects, give preference to
designs which reduce long-term maintenance costs.
See responses to WiIlakenzie Area Plan Land Use Element Policy 4 and Transportation
Element Policy 4.
2.8 Compliance with Eugene Code (EC) 9.7730(3)(a) and (b),
EC 9.8424(1)(b) and (c), and EC 9.8424(2)
EC 9. 7730 Criteria for Approval of Plan Amendment
(3) The following criteria shall be applied by the city council in approving or denying a
Metro Plan amendment application:
(a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant Statewide Planning Goals
adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission and
(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally
inconsistent.
Section 2.6 provides a discussion of consistency with the Statewide Planning Goals.
Section 2.7(a) provides a discussion of consistency with the Metro Plan and a discussion
of why the amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
EC 9.8424 Refinement Plan Amendment Approval Criteria
The planning commission shall evaluate proposed refinement plan amendments based on
the criteria set forth below, and forward a recommendation to the city council, The ciiy
council shall decide whether to act on the application. If the city council decides to act, it
shall approve, approve with modifications or deny a proposed refinement plan
amendment. Approval, or approval with modifications shall be based on compliance with
the following criteria:
(1) The refinement plan amendment is consistent with all of the following:
(b) Applicable provisions of the Metro Plan.
Section 2.7(a) provides a discussion of the applicable provisions ofthe Metro Plan.
. Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 016 200S
PI!:lnnot'. C II
, -,
(1) The refinement plan amendment is consistent with all of the following:
(c) Remaining portions of the refinement plan.
Section 2. 7( c) provides a discussion of the applicable proVISIOns of the applicable
refinements plans including the Willakenzie Area Plan, Riverfront Park Study, Laurel
Hill Plan, South Hill Study, and Entrance Beautification Study.
(2) The refinement plan amendment addresses one or more of the following:
(a) An error in the publication of the refinement plan.
(b) New inventory material which relates to a statewide planning goal.
(c) New or amended community policies.
(d) New or amended provisions in afederallaw or regulation, state statute,
state regulation, statewide planning goal, or state agency land use plan.
(e) A change of circumstances in a substantial manner that was not anticipated at the
time the refinement plan was adopted.
An amendment is required pursuant to (e). At the time the Willakenzie Area Plan was
adopted, 1-5 was a given element of the system, and replacement of the 1-5 bridge for
safety reasons was not envisioned. Consequently, the Willakenzie Area Plan did not
provide for replacement of the bridge.
2.9 Other Information
At the request of city staff, ODOT is or will be providing the following additional
information, although not directly relevant to any applicable review criterion.
a. Project Design
Detailed maps and drawings of the proposed replacement bridges will be provided prior
to the initial public hearing, following public testimony on the draft Environmental
Assessment.
b. Status of Other Permit Applications
As noted in Section 2.1 above, ODOT will need to apply for and obtain additional
permits from Springfield and Eugene before it can begin project construction. The plan
amendments requested herein are prerequisites to the permitting process. They are
required to allow the project to move forward. Once approved, the project can move into
the "project development" stage, obtaining permits as necessary to construct in areas that
are flood ways or floodplains or affect greenway and GoalS resources. This approach is
consistent with the TPR. See OAR 660-012-0050(3).
Plan Amendment Request
2/0112008
Date Received
FEB 0 1 ~g08
Planner: BJ
~
~,
c. Relationship with NEPA Process
This project involves transportation improvements that will be funded, in part, with
federal funds, As such, the project must follow the process established under NEP A.
ODOT's coordination rules under OAR 731-015-0075, provide as follows for projects
involving federal environmental review:
"(3) Except as otherwise set forth in section (4) of this rule, [ODOT] shall rely on
affected cities and counties to make all plan amendments and zone changes
necessary to achieve compliance with the statewide planning goals and
compatibility with local comprehensive plans after completion of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment and before
completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement or Revised
Environmental Assessment. These shall include the adoption of general and
specific plan provisions necessary to address applicable statewide planning
goals."
This application will come before Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County following
completion of the Environmental Assessment and following or concurrent with public
hearings on that document. Consistent with this rule, final action on the federal
environmental document will not occur until after the necessary comprehensive plan
amendments are approved.37
d. Relationship with Other Projects
Project planning has considered other reasonably foreseeable future projects, Other
projects in the area include ongoing studies of the Franklin Boulevard corridor and the
Franklin - Glenwood interchanges. In addition, a third railroad track on the south side of
the river near Franklin Boulevard may be added, No specific plans for these areas have
been developed at this time. To account for potential improvements to the Franklin
Boulevard corridor and the railroad (as yet unplanned), proposed replacement bridges
would have greater vertical and horizontal clearances than the decommissioned and
detour bridges in order to provide more clearance over Franklin Boulevard. The
additional clearance at Franklin Boulevard is to provide flexibility to local jurisdictions
for future improvements to the Franklin Boulevard corridor. Additional clearance is also
required to meet current vertical clearance requirements for state highways. Although
there are no specific plans for future improvements to Franklin Boulevard, the proposed
clearances would allow the addition of turning or through lanes, sidewalks or
bicycle/pedestrian paths, transit lanes, aesthetic treatments, or other improvements.
t"'loo
~"~
,
37 According to an attorney in the O'egon Department of Justice, notwithstanding OAR 731-015-0075, the
local public hearing process for the land use applications need not await completion of the Environmental
Assessment in the current ci,cumstance because (I) the bridge is already part of both the approved Oregon
Highway Plan and TransPlan; (2) ,eplacing the bridge is consistent with these transportation system plans,
provided the new, bridge is in the same general location and se,ves the same function. Should a no-buiLll. .
alternative. ~e ch?sen, the application will be withdrawn. Date Hecelvem
I
I
Planner: BJ
I
FEB 0 k200S
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
. .
"
e. Project Funding
The 1-5 Willamette River Bridge replacement project is in both the MTIP and the RTP.
The project is part of the aTIA III Statewide Bridge Replacement Program and is
identified as "Bundle 220." The project has funding in the amount of $180 million,
which covers not only the costs of removing the decommissioned Canoe Canal and
detour bridges and constructing the replacement bridges, but also all associated costs,
including the costs for preparing federal envirorullental documents and obtaining land use
plan amendments and permits.
f. Consistency with East Alton Baker Park Plan
While the East Alton Baker Park Plan (March 1996) is not directly applicable to the
bridge replacement project, the project is consistent with the plan. The East Alton Baker
Park Plan contains just one policy that would be relevant to the bridge replacement
project. That is Policy 14.0, which provides in part:
"With the exception of the 1-5 overpass, establish an environment free of
motorized vehicles' that will enhance the use of pedestrian and bicycle corridors
and serve the needs of all park users..." (Emphasis added.)
Because this policy clearly recognizes the 1-5 overpass, which the bridge project will be
replacing, as well as its usage by motorized vehicles, the bridge project is consistent with
the East Alton Baker Park Plan.
Date Received
Plan Amendment Request
2/01/2008
FEB 0 1 200S 69
Planner: BJ