New Search
Summary of Impacts <br />by a reduction in the amount of property to be devoted to the federal courthouse. In sum, there <br />would be no significant difference in land use impacts between options A and B under <br />Alternative 1. " <br />Development of the courthouse as a public facility or as an office use would be permitted in all <br />of the zones listed for the Eugene alternative site. The current downtown planning process in <br />Eugene is likely to recommend that the Chiquita (formerly Agripac) site be rezoned to a mixed- <br />.. use designation, and a previous study, the South Bank study, supports this rezoning. A <br />courthouse is an allowed use in a mixed-use zone. Alternative 2, option B would concentrate the <br />federal courthouse activities onto a smaller site than t~lternative 2, option A and would allow for <br />redevelopment of the remainder of the site. There would be no significant difference in land use <br />impacts between options A and B under Alternative 2. <br />Transportation <br />Traffic Flow <br />Development of any of the action alternatives would not significantly affect traffic flow during <br />the horizon year 2003. Construction and operation of the proposed courthouse would not change <br />the level of service from the no-action condition at any of the evaluated intersections and would <br />not reduce the level of service below the standard (level of service D) set by both Eugene and <br />Springfield. <br />Public Parking <br />The proposed project would increase the demand for pazking in the vicinity of the new <br />courthouse. Under Alternative 1 (the Riverfront site), parking would be insufficient to meet the <br />minimum demand, and there is expected to be a significant shortage of pazking. <br />Alternative 2, the Chiquita (formerly Agripac) site, has adequate pazking available to meet a <br />minimum demand (including parking required by courthouse employees) but does not have <br />sufficient pazking to meet the entire demand associated with the courthouse project (such as <br />visitor pazking). Selecting this alternative would result in a moderate shortage of parking. <br />Public transportation and pedestrian bicycle amenities would not be significantly affected by <br />selection of either of the alternatives. <br />Public Services and Utilities <br />Although relocation of utilities would be necessary under either Alternative 1 or 2, impacts on <br />utility services would not be significant. Both Eugene and Springfield have adequate police, fire, <br />and emergency medical service coverage. No significant impacts on public services or utilities <br />are anticipated to result from either of these alternatives. <br />New Federal Courthouse 13 Final EIS <br />