Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lane County staff lay out costs and options to bring local access roads into county system; commissioners weigh equity, funding and partnerships
Summary
Staff told the Lane County Board on June 9 that the county has about 514 local access roads (~112 miles) and estimated evaluation costs to accept 13 miles of L's at $1.22–$1.7 million; reconstruction to meet Eugene standards could total roughly $88 million and Blue River about $3.3 million. Staff recommended updating Lane Manual Chapter 15, developing a petition form, and establishing fees; commissioners discussed equity, county staffing limits, and possible special districts, local improvement districts, or intergovernmental agreements.
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lane County staff on June 9 presented a detailed assessment of local access roads ("L's") and potential pathways for integrating them into the county road system, including timelines, costs, statutory limits and procedural requirements.
Cassidy Mills, Transportation Planning Supervisor, told the Board there are approximately 514 local access roads in Lane County totaling roughly 112 miles; about 167 of those road segments are inside urban growth boundaries and approximately 347 are outside. Staff emphasized that these figures are approximations requiring survey verification and historical record review.
Staff summarized the legal and procedural framework. Under Oregon Revised Statute provisions cited in the presentation (OS 368.031), counties may spend money on local access roads in emergencies or when the county road official recommends expenditure and the governing body enacts an order or resolution. Lane County's Lane Manual and Lane Code Chapter 15 set the petition process: to initiate county consideration, petitioners must typically obtain signatures from at least 60% of the owners representing at least 60% of the land abutting the public right‑of‑way; public works then conducts survey, traffic, pavement (PCI), ADA, and stormwater analyses before making a recommendation.
On costs, staff estimated the evaluative effort to accept 13 miles of L's into the county road system would range between $1.22 million and $1.7 million depending on complexity. There are currently no petition processing fees and no mechanism to recoup administrative or technical review costs. Reconstruction estimates provided to approximate city standards ranged up to roughly $88 million to reconstruct the Eugene L's over a multiyear schedule (assuming about one mile per year from 2028–2040 and including inflation); Blue River was estimated at approximately $3.3 million. Staff estimated ongoing routine maintenance would be on the order of $13,000 per mile annually for rural roadways and $31,000 per mile annually for urban roadways (today’s dollars). Staff also cited recent chip‑seal costs of roughly $32,000 per mile as an example.
Because of the fiscal and staff impact, the staff recommendation is that the board direct updates to Lane Manual Chapter 15 to: clarify acceptance criteria, create a formal petition application, and establish a corresponding processing fee. Staff also recommended exploring alternatives such as local improvement districts, special road districts, privatization, or intergovernmental agreements with the City of Eugene for roads already approaching city standards.
Commissioners pressed staff on equity and practical consequences for property owners. Commissioner Far and others expressed concern that property owners may not have known they take access from an L, that this status can affect resale value, and that bringing L's to city standards could impose prohibitive costs. Staff noted a 2021 effort to add notifications to title records and GIS entries to inform prospective buyers and acknowledged gaps in GIS coverage; staff said direct mail notification to affected owners could be performed but would be an additional cost. Commissioners also discussed county staffing and equipment shortfalls for urban maintenance tasks and the need to coordinate with the City of Eugene and other jurisdictions.
Board members suggested follow‑up options including a joint work session with the City of Eugene, further study of funding mechanisms (LIDs, special districts), and drafting manual revisions to create an accessible petition process. No formal board vote or direction to accept specific roads was taken at the meeting; staff will return with recommended code/manual changes and options for the board’s consideration.

