Item 2A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Solomon also wished to approach the County with five high priority projects involving the preserva- tion and maintenance of local streets. She indicated she would be willing to testify at public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners and participate in the process however she was needed. She opposed the motion because the money would be returned to the general pool. Ms. Taylor remarked that losing the funding was not a good enough reason to go through with the project. Mayor Torrey said he would vote against the motion in the event of a tie. He stated that the Chad Drive extension was a good project from the perspectives of the cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County. He acknowledged there was a backlog of maintenance issues but averred that to stop traffic from flowing appropriately through different venues in north Eugene, an area with the highest level of congestion of any part of the City, just to make a political statement was "foolish." He advised against supporting the motion and expressed that he hoped the new Mayor would maintain her independence. He stressed the importance of working together as partners in the MPC and underscored that we are a system and not just a city. Mr. Kelly felt the motion was hardly a political statement. Rather, he thought it was a policy statement about what the priority needs of maintenance and preservation were. He disagreed that the money would be lost to another transportation project should the Chad Drive project be rejected. He related that he had spoken with MPC Chair Bettman and she had indicated that the MPC could redirect that funding "anywhere they wanted with a vote." Mr. Meisner hoped that the council would look carefully at the connection between some kinds of improvements and maintenance needs. He noted the work on the Ferry Street Bridge which, though an improvement, would help preserve the bridge for decades. He thought the Chad Drive project was in that category. Ms. Bettman reiterated that while the MPC dealt with approximately $185 million, the flexible funding amounted to $2,231,000. She said this was the only money that could be spent on maintenance and preservation. Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to substitute a motion that the City of Eugene re-submit all of the City's projects that were compet- ing for STIP-U money under a category of maintenance and preservation so that the City could still compete for this money but it would be allo- cated to maintenance and preservation projects. Mr. Pap6 opined that 20 minutes was not enough time to adequately consider the MTIP. He recommended the City Council include it as an additional agenda item at another work session. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to table the item until January 19, 2005. Ms. Bettman felt that the council lacked much of the information it needed. She reiterated her opposition to the bikeway project. Ms. Taylor supported tabling the item. She said more time was needed to consider the MTIP. Mr. Schoening requested the opportunity to speak. He stated that the two projects the council had been MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 8, 2004 Page 9 Work Session