Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Director Jan Childs distributed handouts to members. She introduced TransPlan <br />Project Manager Tom Schwetz of the Lane Council of Governments, Nick Arnis of the Oregon <br />Department of Transportation (ODOT), City Transportation Engineer Dave Reinhard, and <br />Stephano Viggiano of Lane Transit District as staff members who would be available to answer <br />council questions. <br /> <br />Ms. Childs said that the majority of the work had been finished on Issue Area 4 (Transportation <br />System Improvements Road System) during the last meeting. She said that one of the projects <br />Mr. Kelly had questions about was related to I-5 at 30th Avenue. She said that Mr. Arnis would be <br />able to address questions about that particular project. <br /> <br />Ms. Childs said that Attachment B was a list of additional recommended revisions to the <br />TransPlan project list that was on council agenda page 25. She said that these projects were <br />recommended by Eugene staff and were specific to Eugene. She noted that for each of the <br />issue areas where the other adopting officials had held discussions, the council would find charts <br />that updated it in terms of discussion and direction that had been provided. She said that her <br />entry under the West Eugene Parkway included a request for staff to provide a briefing <br />background paper on the project and majority support for discussion of the project at the joint <br />adopting officials work session. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly raised concern over the 30th Avenue/I-5 interchange project. He said he needed more <br />help on two projects related to the 30th Avenue/I-5 interchange. He said that Project #297, as <br />described in the staff public testimony response, sounded perfectly reasonable to him. He said <br />TransPlan Project #257, which was a major upgrade of the overall 30th Avenue/I-5 interchange <br />costing $15 million, concerned him because of the outlay of money in a 20-year time frame for an <br />area outside of the Urban growth boundary. He did not want to make it easier for the urban <br />growth boundary to move in that direction. <br /> <br />In response to Mr. Kelly, Mr. Arnis said that the 30th Avenue/I-5 interchange was within the federal <br />planning boundary of the metropolitan area. He said the project was not within the urban growth <br />boundary, but the project would fix the design problems at that particular interchange. He said <br />the project scored very high with ODOT because of older deficient designs and the need to <br />prepare for the needs of future congestion. He added that future long-range plans for Glenwood, <br />Franklin and I-5, and 30th Avenue and I-5 needed to be looked at with a comprehensive <br />approach. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner supported the comprehensive look at that area. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr said that safety was his number one concern. He commented that ODOT had done an <br />excellent job of rating projects based on the safety issue. He was not convinced that there would <br />be pressure to expand the urban growth boundary in that area because of action the council had <br />taken in the past. He reiterated that an examination of that series of interchanges would put any <br />pressure on the urban growth boundary. <br /> <br />Mr. Schwetz said that the need for the project resulted from growth within the urban growth <br />boundary. He stressed that the interchange was used by residents from within the urban growth <br />boundary. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 agreed with Mr. Farr's comments on safety. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 19, 2000 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />