Laserfiche WebLink
parties to look carefully at the project and keep in mind the interests and concerns of ODOT. Mr. Green <br />believed that even if another alternative was adopted, there would still be congestion problems on West 11th <br />Avenue in the future. <br /> <br />Mr. Green left the meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor announced a potential conflict of interest because of his employment with the engineering firm that <br />worked on Unit lA. He declared that the conflict would not preclude him participating in the discussion. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor asked what ODOT's position if Unit 2 was not feasible. Mr. Pirrie reiterated ODOT's interest <br />in preserving the State highway system. Mr. Pirrie questioned what the utility of Unit 1 would be if <br />Unit 2 was not constructed. Without Unit 2, he asked what the resulting volume of traffic might <br />be on the Beltline Highway and what could be done to get traffic into Beltline. He demonstrated <br />his comments using a wall map of the area in question. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor asked why an intersection, such as that at Highway 105 at Main Street in Springfield, <br />could not be used. Mr. Pirrie said that would be the type of intersection that the State would be <br />left with, which was not acceptable. He said that ©D©T would be back to planning, traffic <br />studies and rescoping. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ suggested that there might be a potential to get some additional federal funding from <br />Congress. Mr. Carlson said that there was already some federal funds built into TransPlan's <br />financial revenue assumptions, and that some earmarked funds are expected over the next three <br />transportation planning cycles. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Pap~ about the lack of a local Area Commission on <br />Transportation (ACT), Mr. Pirrie said that ACTs were developed at the suggestion of the OTC to <br />develop priority lists and make recommendations to the OTC. Each ACT has a charter, with <br />decisions made by the local elected officials. There are three ACTs in Region 2. In the Lane <br />County Area, the MPC agreed that the Lane County Board of County Commissioners would <br />serve as the ACT. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey asked what would happen if Eugene proceeded with the full parkway, Unit lA was <br />constructed, and then the State did not have funding to complete the parkway. Mr. Pirrie <br />believed that ©D©T would work to secure the needed funding. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey asked if ©D©T had any responsibility to provide funds to deal with the congestion <br />impacts that will result if the parkway was not built since the only way to get into Eugene from the <br />west was on West 11th Avenue. Mr. Pirrie said that was a tough question. He said that currently, <br />local street network funds that were approved by the last legislative session for work within the <br />right-of-way have been spent. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said he felt that the Eugene City Council was blind-sided by the additional federal <br />funding requirement. He also felt the project was compromised by the change to the northern <br />alignment, which had a greater impact on wetlands, and that was not the local jurisdiction's fault. <br />He said that the east phase has a logical terminus. He said that he did not see why it did not <br />stay in the queue. He added that he was in support of rescoping the project to meet current <br />circumstances. <br /> <br />MINUTES-Joint Meeting- Eugene City Council February 20, 2001 Page 8 <br /> Lane County Commissioners/Lane Transit District Board Members <br /> <br /> <br />