Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Rayor reiterated that the IGA was specific to the segment involved, and the amendment was <br />more global than that. He asked what was left for all LTD to do if the City had control over all <br />project elements. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly solicited comment from Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson confirmed that the City had authority <br />over the right-of-way and LTD would have to follow its regulations. He said that the purpose of <br />the policy committee was to bring the two agencies together to resolve problems. Mr. Kelly <br />thought the amendment overly strong. Mr. Pap~ agreed. <br /> <br /> The amendment to the motion failed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting <br /> yes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Fart, moved to extend time for the item by 15 <br /> minutes. The motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Taylor voting no. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Meisner, moved to amend Section 2 of Resolution <br /> 4670 by adding a new paragraph 6, as follows, and renumbering previous <br /> paragraph 6 to be new paragraph 7: "Provide a commitment by both the City <br /> and LTD that the great majority of BRT corridor service within Eugene will <br /> feature exclusive busways to provide adequate performance and to attract <br /> customers (the goal would be at least 80 percent exclusive busways)." <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that for BRT to succeed as a system, it must be seen as providing a distinct <br />advantage over other forms of transportation in the corridor. Without the exclusive busways, BRT <br />buses will be stuck in the same traffic as single-occupancy vehicles and would not be perceived to <br />have an advantage. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Pap~, Ms. Hocken said she supported the motion as worded. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor preferred to qualify the statement with the phrase "to the greatest possible extent" given <br />that there was uncertainty about future routing. <br /> <br /> The amendment to the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart said that he supported BRT. He appreciated Ms. Bettman's efforts to ensure that the <br />system was done well. However, he said that there was public skepticism about BRT and its <br />efficiency. There were those who feared that BRT would give the community "tomorrow's <br />congestion, today." With the understanding that the pilot phase was an experimental work in <br />progress and change could occur, he would support the resolution. He said that the City and LTD <br />needed to listen to the community's concerns and recognize that tradeoffs might be needed in <br />implementing BRT. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson thought the community needed better, faster public transportation now. She said <br />the system was needed more each day than the day before. It was time to let LTD start the <br />project. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson acknowledged the plan had changed over time, but said that was because LTD <br />was reworking it in response to City Council interests and concerns and the concerns expressed <br />by residents and businesses. She said the council should be pleased by the changes as long as <br />LTD had not compromised the system's success. She said the system had to have the "wow" <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 14, 2001 Page 9 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />