My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 02/26/01 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2001
>
CC Minutes - 02/26/01 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2010 10:28:48 AM
Creation date
8/1/2005 1:37:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/1/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
occur now. Ms. Hocken responded that LTD was committed to working with the City and to being <br />responsive to City suggestions. Mr. Johnson noted that staff had discussed the district's inability <br />to realize the goals of the system immediately, leading to the recommendation for phasing. <br /> <br />Regarding project options, Mr. Meisner advocated for alternative fuel vehicles even if they were <br />not available in the "look" the district wanted. Ms. Hocken hoped the BRT Steering Committee <br />could discuss that issue. She said that the district was looking at potential vehicle types now. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that the phasing was acceptable, but the questions proposed for commission <br />review were very important to him and relevant to his continuing support for the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr said he was impressed with the way the district took input about the project and <br />attempted to address the concerns of those living in the residential areas and the commercial <br />uses along the route. He favored the project and was prepared to move forward. He thanked Ms. <br />Hocken and Mr. Bennett. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor thought BRT would work, was innovative and was good for Eugene. He hoped LTD <br />would show sensitivity to conditions on Franklin Boulevard. He said that both trees and bicycle <br />paths were important, and parts of Franklin lacked a good bicycle system. Those elements must <br />be balanced. Mr. Rayor was concerned that BRT could preclude the addition of bicycle lanes on <br />Franklin. <br /> <br />Ms. Hocken responded that LTD was proposing a three-block area of bicycle improvements with <br />the first phase. She said that bicyclists do not like to use Franklin Boulevard now. Ms. Hocken <br />suggested that the provision of bicycle paths was an ongoing evolving issue. <br />Mr. Kelly said his support for BRT in the future would be dependent on the level of detail in the <br />motion offered to the council. He wanted a motion with bulleted points about the nature of the <br />Phase 1 pilot corridor and the neighborhood connector service. Mr. Kelly said he was very <br />supportive of the BRT concept and supported the project if it included enough attributes to ensure <br />its success. He supported the phasing proposed with the caveat raised by Mr. Meisner and a <br />point mentioned by Mr. Farmer regarding the need to ensure that phasing precluded future build <br />out at a reasonable expense. Mr. Kelly added he supported the phasing because it allowed <br />coordination with the City's vision of Franklin while allowing the City to investigate the potential of <br />running part of the future build-out in place of a current automobile travel lane. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly noted the slip in the project schedule and asked why he should believe the new <br />schedule. Ms. Hocken responded that the Eugene council had been scheduled to review the <br />project in November 2000 and was only considering it now. The Planning Commission took <br />longer than anticipated to review the project. She pointed out that the council was not scheduled <br />to make a decision until April. Ms. Hocken thought that once the approval process was completed <br />and the final decision embarked on, the project would proceed quickly and on schedule. <br /> <br />Ken Hamm, Director of LTD, noted that the district had committed to the Congressional delegation <br />that it would have community concurrence before it moved forward with BRT. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman supported the questions being referred to the commission, and said she would like <br />to see the council consider the questions under the section "Should other project options be <br />considered." She thought the commission should be asked to discuss that section as well. Ms. <br />Bettman thought issues related to jurisdiction should be referred to the council, and suggested <br />that construction management issues were more appropriately addressed by staff. <br /> <br /> MINUTE--Eugene City Council February 26, 2001 Page 13 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.