Item 1: FY08-FY13 Draft Capital Improvement Program

Home Browse Search

Attachment B Excerpt from December 12, 2006 Planning Commission Minutes – CIP Public Hearing M I N U T E S (DRAFT) Public Hearing Eugene Planning Commission th Sloat Room—The Atrium—99 West 10 Avenue December 12, 2006 PRESENT: Rick Duncan, Vice President; Phillip Carroll, Randy Hledik, Ann Kneeland, Anthony McCown, John Lawless, members; Steven Nystrom, Planning and Development Department; Mark Schoening, Public Works Department; Glen Svendsen, John Huberd, Central Services. ABSENT: Jon Belcher, member; Mike Sullivan, ex officio member. PUBLIC HEARING ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Mr. Duncan called the meeting to order and determined there was consensus to waive a formal presentation and proceed to a discussion of the Draft FY08-FY12 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and a public hearing. Mr. Huberd asked for guidance from the commission on the proposed CIP projects to assure they were consistent with the City’s goals and policies. Mr. Hledik said he was unable to find improvements to Old Coburg Road in the transportation section of the CIP. Mr. Schoening said that was identified as the Chad Drive project. Ms. Kneeland asked if any of the work regarding connectivity of the Ridgeline Trail was reflected in the CIP as part of acquisitions or included in other documents. Mr. Schoening said that was part of the Parks, Recreation & Open Space Comprehensive Plan and recently passed parks and open space bond measure. Mr. Nystrom added that strategies for those connections were embedded in other documents such as the Comprehensive Plan and while the bond measure dedicated funds for acquisition there were no specific sites identified. Mr. Duncan opened the public hearing. He noted there was no one from the public present to speak and called for comments and questions from the commission. Mr. Carroll noted that there were references to funding from the Downtown Urban Renewal District but not the Riverfront Urban Renewal District in the section on public buildings and facilities courthouse district. He asked why the Riverfront funding was not identified. Mr. Svendsen said that the Riverfront district was not generating sufficient revenue at this point and there were no plans for other sources of funding. Mr. Carroll asked why it was not a placeholder. Mr. Nystrom said that the project was still emerging and planning was in its infancy. Mr. Huberd explained that placeholder was the lowest level of certainty and the project was important and would be retained in the CIP even though a funding strategy had not yet been identified.