01/13/1986 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Ms. Brody said the Planning Commission recommended several changes to clarify the transit goal. The changes indicate the automobile will be the basis for the transportation system, the transit goal may not be attained, transit use will be continuously monitored, and an annual report on progress toward the' goal will be made to the local governments. Ms. Brody said a lower transit goal would not have an immediate impact on the short-range projects in the TransPlan. By the time the mid-range projects are planned, remodeling during the major update of the TransPlan will be complete. Mr. Rutan said the transit goal is unattainable, but he did not think a change in the goal was important enough to justify what it would cost. He said the TransPlan is valid even if the transit goal is not attainable. He was confident the goal will be modified later. He recommended no changes in the goal. Ms. Bascom agreed with Mr. Rutan. She said the annual monitoring will indicate progress in reaching the goal. Answering a question from Mr. Holmer, Dave Reinhard of the Public Works Department said the reconstruction of the Ferry Street Bridge is an example of a medium-range project in the TransPlan. A long lead time is needed for it. He said the analyses for the project will include alternative transit goals and modal splits. He was sure the City would err on the high side by building more than the minimum number of lanes indicated by the analyses. Responding to a question from Mr. Hansen, Kirk McKinley of the Planning Department said the Lane Transit District (LTD) submitted the chart on page 23 of the TransPlan which indicates that transit facilities sufficient for the transit goal will be financed by the payroll tax and Federal Urban Mass Transit Administration funds. He said attainment of the goal will mean "standing room only" during rush hours. The councilors did not make any changes in the goal. 2. Addition to the Introduction or of a Preface: Ms. Brody discussed the Preface recommended by the Eugene Planning Commission and the addition to the Preface recommended by the staff to respond to Mr. Rutan's concern about how projects will be developed. Mr. Rutan said he approved of the addition. Ms. Ehrman pointed out that the preface will be very short. She suggested it be included in the introduction text to the TransP1an. Mr. Holmer asked about the difference in the recommendations from the Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions and the Eugene Planning Commission. Ms. Brody responded that the MATC will resolve the difference. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 13, 1986 Page 4