My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 07/25/01 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2001
>
CC Minutes - 07/25/01 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:30:46 AM
Creation date
8/1/2005 1:45:04 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.
/
8
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
At Mr. PapS's request, Mr. Pirrie discussed the work that had been done on elements of the West <br />Eugene Parkway to this point (Units lA and 1B). Without Units 2A and 2B, the parkway was in a <br />no-build status. Mr. Pirrie noted that money was still allocated for the project at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 asked Mr. Pirrie what would become of the right-of-way purchased by ODOT if the <br />parkway was not build. Mr. Pirrie did not know. He noted that ODOT had purchased right-of-way <br />for Unit lA, Seneca Road to Beltline. Right-of-way acquisition had been halted at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 asked how a flyover at Beltline could be constructed given the store being built at the <br />corner of West 11th Avenue and Beltline. Mr. Pirrie said ODOT was not able to buy right-of-way in <br />advance of a project. He said that whatever the department came up with for the intersection <br />would have impacts on land requirements at the intersection. Mr. Reinhard concurred with Mr. <br />Pirrie, although he did not think the construction at the intersection would prohibit a flyover. He <br />considered the situation an obstacle rather than a fatal flaw. He noted that the City had no <br />rationale for condemning the property in question at this point. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asserted that the West Eugene Parkway was in a no-build status; the council made <br />that decision some time ago. She had attended parts of the charrette and had been <br />disappointed by the discussion of what was to be done given that decision. She had thought the <br />charrette would start with proposed solutions. She did not consider the votes taken at the <br />charrette conclusive because not all those voting were elected officials. Ms. Taylor thought it <br />unfortunate the council did not have two days to spend working with experts on solutions. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said the council needed to do a better job of partnering and communicating with the <br />other agencies involved. He thought an interagency working group might be a good approach. <br />The group could work on all the ideas that had been suggested. He suggested the City, County, <br />ODOT, Lane Transit District, and Department of Land Conservation and Development participate. <br />He said key to him was to determine how to have multiple projects move forward together as he <br />anticipated the solution would be several projects. He asked staff to help the council develop a <br />motion for future action that reflected that multiple solutions would move forward and a working <br />group would keep the process going. Mr. Kelly suggested that the solutions could involve <br />engineering studies and analysis for a roadway on the eastern parkway alignment, moving ahead <br />with study and planning for street treatments on West 11th Avenue east of Beltline, and transit. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson reviewed the eight items she proposed in her e-mail message, noting it <br />suggested road projects, projects related to community livability and design, and pedestrian and <br />bicycle projects. Ms. Nathanson said that her e-mail reflected a combined strategy, but a <br />combined strategy may not work if all elements were not included. She expressed concern about <br />information that had been shared by ODOT with the council about what could be done, and said <br />she was discouraged that it might not be possible to accomplish a combined strategy. She <br />asked what would happen if the council could not make its approach work: would it allow a <br />quadrant of the city to be destroyed because of a lack of facility such as the Amazon Parkway, <br />which kept traffic flowing smoothly in southeast Eugene? She questioned what would have <br />happened to Hilyard and Willamette streets in the absence of that facility, and said that impact <br />could be multiplied many times in west Eugene. She was concerned that the result would be a <br />greater impact to West 18th Avenue, which would have to take more of a share of east-west <br />traffic. Ms. Nathanson said she could not sit by and watch West 18th Avenue and a quarter of the <br />city destroyed by traffic because the City could not find good traffic solutions in west Eugene. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 25, 2001 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.