10/09/1989 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e at the road impact issue but the east bank trail would be looked at in the vicinity of the project. She said the east bank trail itself is a separate project and would require separate action and General Fund support. Staff recommended including the east bank trail project in the eIP update and capital budget adoption process. It is currently listed as an assessment project in FY92. Ms. Schue moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to direct staff to include project funding in the update of the eIP for the Environmental Assessment of the East Bank Trail. The intent is to determine the environmental impacts, location, and cost of the unbuilt portions of the East Bank Trail and to establish time lines for construction of the trail. Mr. Boles asked whether mass transit would be included as part of the study of the use of gas tax and road funds. Ms. Andersen responded that the mass transit implications would be considered as part of examining the opportunity to provide for mixed use and offsetting trips by transit ridership. She clarified that mass transit would be considered in the same way it is in TransPlan, as a means of handling some trips. Ms. Andersen said that bike lanes on the bridge would be included in the study. Mr. Gleason said it was important to distinguish between the public and private issues. The public's issue is broader than this particular river crossing. Mass transit and individual transit crossings that will be impacted by this project should be examined as part of the study. Those e areas of impact include the 1-105 interchange, Ferry Street Bridge, the Delta interchange, Highway 99, and the Chambers Overpass. He said that there are significant public policy questions that should be addressed by the environmental impact study because they will directly affect future opportunities for mass transit in and out of the corridor. Mr. Bennett asked for clarification of the motion's authorization of expenditures for the East Bank trail. Mr. Gleason said approval of the motion before the council would add to the eIP a proposal to fund the analysis for the project. A district could be formed later to assess the property owners for the project. Ms. Andersen emphasized the importance of initiating an analysis because of the wetland implications in the corridor. Answering a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Andersen said the East Bank Trail project would compete for funding with the also-incomplete Fern Ridge Trail. Mr. Boles asked about the requirement to hold a public hearing regarding any proposed amendments to the eIP. Ms. Andersen responded that the motion under consideration would give direction to staff for preparation of a proposal to come back to the council which would then determine whether to amend the eIP (as part of the eIP update process). Mr. Bennett maintained that the issue was being approached in the wrong way and said he did not consider the request to be in the public interest. He suggested that the East Bank Trail project should be processed the same as any other request for inclusion in the CIP. e MINUTES--Eugene eity Council October 9, 1989 Page 8