Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pap8 agreed with Ms. Nathanson remarks regarding the "wow" factor and the use of new <br />technology. He asked what the buses would look like and how they would be powered. Mr. <br />Hamm noted that the board, by resolution, had committed itself to a hybrid diesel-electric <br />application as soon as the technology was proven. He said LTD had committed itself to a system <br />that resembled the image of rail, and had discussed various options with different manufacturers. <br />He believed that when the system "hit the road," the community would see something that looked <br />different and was environmentally friendly. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 asked how many trees would be planted in Phase 1. Mr. Vigianno said that would be <br />determined during the final design. However, he anticipated that many more trees would be <br />planted than would be removed. LTD would work with the City on the type and location of the <br />trees to be planted. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 thanked LTD staff and asked Ms. Hocken to thank the LTD board for its willingness to <br />meet with the council and answer its questions. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor thanked LTD staff and Ms. Hocken, saying BRT was very progressive and the agency <br />had a lot of good ideas. He thought the BRT concept good for a city of Eugene's size. He did not <br />think the system could meet everyone's expectations but believed that many people had input into <br />the system design. He said the City wanted to work with LTD to make BRT a success. He <br />suggested the possibility the system could eventually become a loop system, serving major <br />employers in both Eugene and Springfield. Mr. Rayor thought the success of the first phase key <br />to securing further federal dollars. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor thanked the LTD staff and board. She agreed with Ms. Nathanson that better and <br />faster bus service was needed, but she believed the pilot project supplanted service that was <br />already successful. If BRT did not improve service, it would kill the remainder of the system. She <br />wanted better bus service for the entire community. Ms. Taylor thought the council was being <br />rushed to approve the system. She was not ready to support the resolution. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she supported the concept of BRT but was not satisfied with the pilot project as <br />proposed by LTD. She termed the money to be spent on the pilot project astronomical and said <br />the numbers did not add up to her. Because her amendment regarding the City's authority over <br />system design had failed and she thought Eugene was buying a "pig in a poke" because of the <br />lack of final design, she could not support the resolution. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said the community needed a BRT system now. He was not excited about the pilot <br />corridor but acknowledged LTD had to start somewhere. He predicted that LTD would hear from <br />the City Council about next phases. He said the amendments that had been made to the <br />resolution and the comments of staff had satisfied the majority of his concerns. <br /> <br /> The motion as amended passed, 6:2; Ms. Bettman and Ms. Taylor voting no. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr left the meeting. <br /> <br />D.Work Session: Status Report on High Priority Stream Corridor Acquisition Planning <br /> <br />City Engineer Les Lyle joined the council for the item. He provided an overview of the stream <br />corridor acquisition planning efforts and associated time line for public review. Mr. Lyle reported <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 14, 2001 Page 11 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />