New Search
Record of Decision Attachment C -Agency Comment and Responses <br />2. ODOT comments -Eugene <br />2:1-Work began on the traffic <br />study for the proposed new <br />federal courthouse in Eugene in <br />January 1999. At that time, three <br />sites located within the downtown <br />Eugene business district were <br />selected for review in the <br />environmental assessment. <br />GSA's consultants coordinated <br />with the city of Eugene to meet <br />the city's draft concun ency <br />standards. After the <br />environmental assessment failed <br />to identify an acceptable site, <br />GSA decided to review five new <br />locations, three in Eugene and two <br />in the city of Springfield. <br />GSA's consultants met with <br />Springfield city representatives <br />and completed a scoping of the <br />two sites and the traffic issues the <br />city wanted analyzed. The city of <br />Springfield requested that Inca use <br />the Lane County Council of <br />Governments (LCOG) traffic <br />model to review the distribution <br />of trips to and from the sites. <br />GSA's consultants coordinated <br />with LCOG to obtain trip <br />distribution for both Eugene and <br />Springfield sites in accordance <br />with the LCOG model. LCOG <br />also provided GSA's consultants <br />with a modal split breakdown and <br />r growth ra#e for the areas <br />surrounding the alternative sites. <br />A copy of the draft EIS was <br />walled to the Oregon Department <br />of Transportation shortly after the September 5, 2000 <br />issuance date. The fmal EIS was issued on <br />December 18, 2001 and a copy was provided to the <br />Oregon Department of Transportation, at the same <br />address used for mailing the draft EIS. As stated in <br />your recent letter, while you did receive the fmal on <br />December 19, 2000, you had not received the draft <br />EIS. The GSA appreciates your rapid review of the <br />Draft EIS and traffic report after your receipt of these <br />documents on January 12, 2001. <br />y~~On DeparimenfofTransporta6on <br />1. i l Regio=12 ' <br />xnaa.~a~niaxa.i~~~.a ~ - 955AiiponRA.SE,BIiI'gB. <br />~, _., ._.. .. ~.. ..Salem OR 973013395 <br />(503j 986-26D0 <br />'.:. S . ~ . ~ FAX 1503) 98(;•2630 `. <br />__ <br />February 2, 2001 ' ' rite cone <br />~' Michael Levine <br />U.S. General Services Administration <br />aoo Ism streersw <br />Auburn; Washington 98001-6599 <br />SUBJECT: 'New Federal Courthouse Final Eavironmrntal, Impact Statement . <br />Eugene/Springfield, Lane County, Oregon.:. <br />- Dear Mr. Levine: , <br />Thank you for;extending the opportunityto comment on the Final <br />Environmental lmpacY Statement (FEiS) for the new federal courthouse. During <br />our:discussioiion January 18, 2001; I stated'tha4 tiie'Oregon Department of <br />ltanspprtation (ODOTj has concerns about the documentation provided to <br />justify the federal decision consistent with the National Environmental Policy <br />Act (NEPA):. ~ODOT's coitcema~relatrto the operation otthe transportation - . <br />system and public safety impacts.' ODOT does not. agree: that the impacts of a, <br />:new Federal,Courthousc have been adequately .studied and declared, or that .. <br />mitigation is not required. Analysis that is more complete should be , <br />undertalten before a final deasion'is made. <br />OIXYP~i:s concerned about the proposed action.lxcause there has been little <br />coordination with ODOT during;pieparatioa; of either the Draft Environmental <br />Impart Statement (DEIS) or the FEiS. This is significant because access to sll <br />locationsidentified in~the FEIS~is-.deprndentupon state highways..-a fact not <br />mentioned in the document.. It is:significant,tiecause the trafLc safety analysis <br />(Apprndu H; DEI3) apparently did not include:the State of Oregon's Crash Data. <br />for the proposed Eugene tocadon-.The highways involved; Pacific Highway West <br />2.i (OR-99Wj'and the McKenzie Highway (OR-126 (Business) are part of the;' ~. <br />National Highway System. Access, to the Cairrthouse via private vehicle; public <br />transit or by foot will affect the operation and safety of those faalities. <br />ODOT received one copy of the FEIS on December 19, 2000.. The information <br />contained in the F'EIS lead to,a request for a copy ot.the DEIS, vJe appreciate <br />.the prompt delivery ofyie DEIS; received January 12,.2001. Our review has. <br />been confined to the preferred alternative location because of the ~ c~nod for ~ ~ ~. ' <br />commrnts. ODOT has identified the following: ~ ~ ~ ~. 6 ~ Q~ ' ~ ~ ' <br />~ 't <br />FEB -1 2a0) 4i ii <br />From 73i.iNNA R'>91 L/~S: <br />GSA's traffic consultant, Inca Engineers, has <br />completed additional analysis in response to this <br />letter. This additional analysis and its results are <br />described below. <br />