• 1996 federal lawsuit overturned 1990 approval (Feds conceded defeat before trial)
• FHWA, BLM, ODOT, Lane County and City Eugene promised "No Build" on June 19, 2001
• Cooperating Agencies: BLM and Army Corps of Engineers did not participate in required "Scoping" of Alternatives
• WEP does not meet the Purpose and Need - the WETLANDS alternative does
• Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation: WETLANDS versus WEP
• Wetlands Mitigation Bank is Bankrupt, replacement wetlands are inferior
• Segmentation and Logical Termini: Western Terminus (Veneta), Eastern Terminus (I-105)
• Land and Water Conservation Fund LWCF lands cannot be used for a highway
• Section 4(f) protects parkland from paving
• Peak Oil and climate change are "new circumstances" that requires reopening the NEPA process
• City of Eugene Adopted Growth Management Policies violated by WEP
• Endangered Species Act: a "license to kill" - Road Kill: Fender's Blue Butterfly and Car Fenders
  controlled burning for wet prairie restoration incompatible with WEP
• environmental justice: WEP traffic dumped onto 6th and 7th would severely impact Whiteaker neighborhood

2 page version (pdf)

WEP haiku

Osprey Group report ignored
WETLANDS alternative &
2001 "No Build" consensus
City, County, State, Fed governments

June 2006: last gasp?
Federal Highway - new route

blog
articles
dictionary
maps
hidden history

flaws:
laws
lies
traffic
cost

West Eugene Wetlands

WEP alternatives:
$17, $88, or $169 million

WEP would have more
traffic lights than
WETLANDS alternative

hospital siting
downtown boondoggles
disaster preparedness
Region 2050

Eugene NOT #1 Green City

TREES:
Transportation
Energy
Environment
Sustainability

From: Barbara Kelley
Sent: Tuesday, 28 May, 2002 10:55 AM
On June 14, 1996, the highway was just about to go through. Therefore, Save Our ecoSystems (SOS), with Attorney Dave Bahr, filed lawsuit Civil 6161-HO in federal court against the Federal Highway Administration, citing violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). SOS won! On July 30, 1996, we were informed:

“Prior to any construction proceeding, we still need to receive the 404 permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers, application pending, and complete coordination with the US Fish and Wildlife Service on threatened and endangered species. In addition we are now in the process of conducting a supplemental EIS for the entire project, rather than just the western and eastern portions. Therefore, we are suspending our approval of the PS&E for the construction of the middle section of the West Eugene Parkway project.”

This lawsuit was settled out of court six weeks after being filed, without ever going in front of a judge. The FHWA knew there was no point to defending the WEP, since the case was extremely illegal and they would lose.

While all of the government planners at all levels of government are aware that the WEP lacked “legal sufficiency” and therefore the FHWA would not even attempt to defend their side in federal court, this historical fact is curiously absent from the various pro-WEP statements from elected officials, ODOT publications, the SDEIS and its re-evaluation, and propaganda from the private promoters from the Chamber of Commerce and similar entities who have financial interests in the WEP and/or related sprawl overdevelopment.