CC Minutes - 02/20/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Sorenson expressed concern that this dispute would be representative of how other local transportation issues would be resolved in the future. Ms. Nathanson said the project has reached this point because of the delay in the project and the fact new regulations were imposed by the state and federal government that are contradictory with each other. She noted that she represented southwest Eugene and her constituents have been counting on the parkway project getting under way. Traffic from West 11th Avenue already spills onto local streets. The congestion on West 11th Avenue was State-imposed congestion on local streets. Ms. Nathanson said that Eugene was on the brink of losing $17 million, which put it in the position of beginning a new five- to ten-year process for planning, estimating, designing, and then competing for scarce dollars. She said that it was her desire to salvage a version of this project, keep the $17 million, and find a solution which will benefit both the State and Eugene. Mr. Gaydos said that from LTD's perspective, it was important that the transportation network work. He said that LTD may consider directing BRT down West 11th Avenue, which was becoming more difficult to do as time progresses. He said that the ability to move people in that direction was important to LTD. He called for an end to blaming and criticizing others, saying that the situation was the result of many factors. Mr. Gaydos suggested that when one of the the 12 Statewide land use planning goals dominated a process, such as natural resource protection, it skewed the land use planning process and affected the future of the region. He said that the project has been in process for long time and he encouraged that the project be moved forward. Mr. Farr, who also represented an area of west Eugene, said that the project would make west Eugene less isolated. He considered the parkway a promise that had made to the citizens of West Eugene. He proposed a series of questions, which he answered in the affirmative: 1) will traffic flow from west Lane County continue to increase; 2) does west Eugene need traffic relief; 3) was there money in place to begin the project; 4) can the project be creatively fit into the 20- year constrained plan, without eliminating other projects; 5) the only project that is in danger of being killed is this project; 6) will the area lose the money allocated for the parkway; 7) does the City risk losing credibility and competitiveness for future projects; and 8) is there a need to move forward with first phase. Referring to Mr. Carlson's comment that the WEWP would require an amendment to accommodate the northern alignment, Mr. Kelly asked if an amendment was needed for Phase 1. Mr. Carlson said that said that those areas have already been designated to the project. No additional changes are needed. Mr. Kelly asked for a copy of the map showing the WEWP designations and the Phase lA alignement. Mr. Kelly said he was committed to working on West Eugene transportation issues. He was very frustrated that there was a desire to hold on to the $17 million but no proposal on how to keep the funds. According to Mr. Pirrie, the only way to keep the $17 million was to accomplish the actions set forth by ODOT, which meant adding the entire $88 million project to the constrained project list. He said that the even the Mayor's proposal, which merited further study, would require a new NEPA process. Further, he said that there have been a number of alternatives, including the proposal to consider lA and 1B as the entire project, but very few facts about this alternate proposal. He proposed two other proposals and has asked staff for answers to address those proposals. He said that staff has not yet prepared answers and he wanted the council to MINUTES-Joint Meeting- Eugene City Council February 20, 2001 Page 9 Lane County Commissioners/Lane Transit District Board Members