Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Kelly agreed that the City did not have a lock on the money involved. He said that nothing <br />was guaranteed; the City can only try to secure the funding. He advocated for a joint work <br />session with the City's intergovernmental partners regarding Ms. Bettman's proposal. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that the projected eight percent reduction in traffic was based on the professionals' <br />best effort to model the future transportation system and represented a good deal of what <br />TransPlan was based upon. He cited projections, noting that the current daily volume on West <br />11th Avenue west of Beltline was 22,000 vehicles a day; if Unit lA was not built, in 2015 there <br />would be 46,000 on the same segment of road. If Unit lA was built, there would be 42,000 <br />vehicles a day. He did not think that a significant improvement. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly hoped the City could also discuss other approaches, such as access management and <br />use of arterial streets. Responding to the mayor's definition of access management, Mr. Kelly <br />disagreed, characterizing access management as rerouting access to businesses and streets <br />rather than cutting off access to businesses and streets. He said that may mean people have to <br />plan ahead to reach the places they wished to go. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner thought Ms. Bettman's proposal was a very constructive approach to traffic on the <br />west side. He thought the issue was not only not building the parkway, but programming the <br />funding. The City had money for only one segment and was guaranteed only that money. He <br />thought if the funding was guaranteed the debate might have changed. However, the competition <br />for funds was so fierce he doubted the parkway would ever achieve full funding. He did not think <br />building Unit lA accomplished much. Mr. Meisner wanted the money to stay in the community <br />and for it to be used on something that would have an actual impact in west Eugene. He did not <br />think the federal government, State government, or voters would provide the needed funds to <br />complete the entire parkway. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner averred that the community had seen what attempting to build its way out of <br />congestion would do. He said that if the parkway was constructed it would carry volumes similar <br />to those cited by Mr. Kelly for West 11th Avenue, tripling current traffic volumes. He did not favor <br />building parallel roadways unless something was done to reduce the impact on the streets he <br />wished to discourage through traffic on. He said that, while not the end, Ms. Bettman's proposals <br />were a good beginning. <br /> <br />Responding to the mayor's question regarding the council's interest in a vote, Mr. Pap~ said that <br />many councilors continued to minimize the 1986 vote. He thought the council should go back to <br />the voters and have the discussion it was having tonight with the public. He believed that the <br />council was insulting the voters by not putting the question before them in an intelligent way. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ read a letter to Mayor Torrey from State senators Susan Castillo, Lee Beyer, and Tony <br />Cocoran requesting that the council reconsider its decision, and stressing the public support the <br />project enjoyed, the public input into the project, the funding already spent on the project, and the <br />parkway's importance as a regional transportation link. The letter suggested that the council's <br />quick action in spite of public support and the public vote would erode public confidence in <br />government processes and become a barrier to the involvement of the City's transportation <br />planning partners in Eugene projects requiring their support. Mr. Pap~ did not think the City would <br />get the support of Lane County and Springfield in reallocating the parkway funding by "slamming <br />the door" on discussion. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 29, 2001 Page 10 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />