My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 10/23/06 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2006
>
CC Minutes - 10/23/06 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:32:09 AM
Creation date
1/11/2007 11:31:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
10/23/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
were selected. He said the list totaled approximately $20 million worth of work and the council was <br />provided with the entire list instead of selected projects so that when the STP-U criteria was established by <br />the MPC staff would have the flexibility to pick those projects that best matched those criteria. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Schoening said that staff would select projects that best <br />met identified criteria in order to maximize the success of project funding applications. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman indicated she would be happy to approve the list. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly commended Eugene’s staff for being steadfast in supporting the council’s adopted priorities <br />during TPC discussions. He said that the criteria recommended by the TPC would come before the MPC <br />for adoption and he and Mayor Piercy would continue to support council priorities. He noted that the <br />metropolitan area received between $1 and $2 million in STP-U funds annually. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor, referring to the $20 million in projects on the list, asked approximately how much in STP-U <br />funds would be available to the City in any year. Mr. Schoening said that Eugene might receive between 40 <br />and 60 percent of total funds available. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor reinforced the point that the funds would make little progress in reducing the backlog of projects, <br />which was growing faster than the STP-U funds available each year, and other options for addressing the <br />backlog were required. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if Eugene typically received 50 percent of the available funds. Mr. Schoening said that <br />when the funds were allocated by population Eugene received 42 percent. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if the council had a role in defining priorities by appointing people to the TPC or approving <br />priorities annually or bi-annually. Mr. Schoening said the process was very complex and involved not only <br />the TPC but required project coordination with EWEB and other entities as well as internally with a wide <br />range of Public Works projects. He said that one of the factors in determining project priority was the <br />practice of distributing both the inconvenience of construction and the benefits across the community. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said she was pleased with the progress to obtain funding and agreed with the practice of <br />distributing projects geographically. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman pointed out that while the STP-U funds were limited there was also the gas tax and dedicated <br />transportation system development charges and SDC reimbursement component fee and every bit helped. <br />She said in the past the policy was to prioritize maintenance and preservation but the practice was not <br />consistent with that. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly agreed that the council should not be involved in prioritization as the City’s engineering and <br />financial model did an excellent job of monitoring projects and identifying the most urgent needs. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to approve the attached list of pave- <br />ment preservation projects as the basis for applications for federal Surface Trans- <br />portation Program-Urban funds for FY07-FY09 to be programmed by the Metro- <br />politan Policy Committee. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 23, 2006 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.