My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packet 7-15-19 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Public Meetings
>
City Council
>
2019
>
07-15-19
>
Agenda Packet 7-15-19 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/5/2019 4:50:41 PM
Creation date
7/5/2019 4:41:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City_Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Packet
City_Council_Meeting_Type
Work Session
City_Council_Meeting_Date
7/15/2019
City_Council_Effective_Date
7/15/2019
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
212
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MovingAhead Spring 2019 Outreach Summary 61 <br />investment in south Eugene is no investment (well, it's EmX or enhanced corridor on Hilyard <br />Street but that's not an option) since the proposed investment is worse than nothing. <br /> I don't want the EmX on River Road. <br /> I definitely see the benefits of better connecting the LCC area to the rest of Eugene via public <br />transit, but perhaps this is not yet the time to make this investment. <br /> I believe in all of these packages you are missing something. <br /> We need some cross-town busses on the north side of town beside the #67. Everywhere I go on <br />this side of town is followed with a lot of walking. Therefore, I don't take the bus often because <br />walking is, in general, not my friend. <br /> How does ridership go down between package B and package C?!? Something seems wrong - <br />please check the math. You're adding $20 million in investment to have a decrease in ridership - <br />why even offer this package. Where are the packages that focus on the south side of town to be <br />able to compare and contrast ridership numbers separate from north? <br /> High cost. Minimal improved service. No wheel to go with the spokes <br /> High cost, low benefit. <br /> EmX is not necessary on River Road. <br /> drop 30th from EmX, build EmX On the other corridors <br /> Does well on most starred criteria. <br /> Dln't like tree removal <br /> Costs higher, more negative deveopment impacts, still don't see the advantage of EmX. <br /> Coburg Rd is the major North South corridor for the Ferry St Bridge area. Unless you are <br />planning on using eminent domain to remove existing homes and businesses this will only <br />create more congestion and risk. <br /> Because i only want enhanced option not option a and c option. <br /> A lot of money, big impact on trees and acreage, big impact on available parking which is already <br />very problematic. We could be using the extra money to work on other areas that need a lot of <br />help <br /> 30tg should be nb <br />Support <br /> This seems to be the sweet spot <br /> This package provides a good balance overall in terms of the enhanced corridors. Giving River <br />Road EmX priority makes sense on the surface, but I'd be interested in seeing rider numbers, <br />especially in comparison of Coburg Road (where I live). What are the projected impacts for each <br />corridor? <br /> This option would be an ok option. my vote is still for option package B. <br /> This option is similar to B, with some increased bike/ped features, but slightly lower increased <br />ridership? Includes improvements to LCC. Improves redevelopment opportunities. <br /> This is my favorite package for this period of transportation investment. Works well to have EMX <br />for River Road and enhancements on other routes, including for LCC. Not as many operating and <br />capital costs and development impacts. Would need to have further emx and enhancements <br />added in the future. EMX on 99 may be an important equity issue--if it is, I think that's important <br />as well. <br />July 15, 2019, Joint Work Session – Item1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.