Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Torrey outlined an alternative proposal he believed ODOT and the FHWA would find <br />acceptable as meeting the original project goal. The proposal connected a widened West 11th <br />Avenue to Highway 99 via Beltline and Unit lA while avoiding the wetlands. The intersections at <br />Beltline and West 11th Avenue would be improved to accommodate new growth. Mayor Torrey <br />estimated the cost of the proposal at $20 million and acknowledged it would require the <br />cooperation of the City's intergovernmental partners. He called for further examination of both his <br />and Ms. Bettman's proposals, saying if the City walked away from the goals of the project it would <br />not have the money to do the work needed on West 11th Avenue. Mayor Torrey said that the City <br />must find a way to address the added impact of more automobiles on the street. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr said the council must find a way to collaboratively address the problems that existed in <br />the corridor in most cost-effective way with a solution the public supported. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr asked how much money has already been spent on the parkway. Carl Wieseke of ODOT <br />estimated $10 million had been spent in planning and right-of-way acquisition. Mr. Farr asked if <br />staff considered that $10 million wasted if the parkway did not go forward. Mr. Wieseke hesitated <br />to say how much could not be recovered. He said if nothing was built, it would represent a poor <br />effort on ODOT's part. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr indicated that while it was not perfect, he could probably support the mayor's proposal. <br />He said that if the council did nothing to alleviate existing and projected congestion on West 11th <br />Avenue, it was wasting both effort and a plan that he thought had merit. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly thought the projected traffic numbers should be looked at in context: was the difference <br />between 42,000 and 46,000 vehicles worth the expenditure of $17 million? Regarding Mr. PapS's <br />recommendation that the council send a proposal back to the voters, he said he had seen no <br />proposals about how such a question would be framed. He said he could reluctantly support <br />sending the voters a measure if it was framed in terms of financial impact. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly thought the mayor's proposal deserved further study. He also thought the staff <br />suggestion for an arterial street following essentially the same route as the parkway deserved <br />study. He asked staff how, if the goal was to retain the funding allocated by ODOT, that could be <br />accomplished in the existing time frame. He said that the mayor's proposal was essentially a new <br />project, which he believed would require a new Environmental Impact Statement (ELS) or update <br />to the existing ElS. In addition, the route would have to be modeled for its impact on traffic. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly questioned whether an additional $3 million would be sufficient to complete the project <br />outlined by the mayor. He asked for firm figures, suggesting it was probably $15 million rather <br />than $3 million because of the businesses that would have to be relocated. <br /> <br />Mr. Carlson said that staff did not know the answer to Mr. Kelly's question. Staff had discussed <br />the possibility of pushing the $17 million now allocated out one year or more in the next State <br />Transportation Improvement Program and completing a Supplement ElS or new ElS. There was <br />no guarantee that the State dollars could be retained for a new project, or that such a project <br />would not need new money. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly was comfortable with staff attempting to work with Eugene's intergovernmental partners <br />on holding the funds while the City studied the alternatives, but until the results of those studies <br />were known, he did not want to program the project in TransPlan. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 29, 2001 Page 11 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />