Laserfiche WebLink
In response to a question from Mr. PapS, Mr. Boggs said that demand would require the parallel <br />runway when the airport's activity was 80 percent of its annual service volume. He added that the <br />maintenance cost of runway 321, the existing cross wind runway, was also driving the need for a <br />new parallel runway. In response to further questions from Mr. PapS, Mr. Boggs said that he <br />would be glad to review the alternatives considered for runway placement. He added that <br />currently the airport owned all the property required to construct a parallel runway. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Torrey about the possibility of increased cargo business from <br />the Portland airport if Portland did not build a new runway, Mr. Boggs said that the discussion <br />about this possibility was ongoing. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly explained that his biggest concern with the plan was the parking expansion. He said that <br />he would feel more comfortable adopting the plan if there was some statement that reflected a <br />change in how parking capacity was planned and that it was not just a linear extrapolation from <br />the past. He suggested also including consideration of changes in alternate modes of <br />transportation such as the airport shuttle. Mr. Boggs said that he agreed with Mr. Kelly and <br />reiterated that parking was a demand-driven issue. Mr. Kelly responded by pointing out that there <br />was a growth management, transportation demand management, and air quality management <br />component that should be taken into account as well. <br /> <br />Lastly, Mr. Kelly asked if the Green Hill Road project was under the Year 2000 Runway 321 Safety <br />Improvements in the CIP. Mr. Boggs said that it was. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor left the meeting at 7 p.m. <br /> <br /> C. Work Session: Ordinance Concerning Key Waterways, And Adding Sections <br /> 6.650, 6.655, 6.660, 6.665, And 6.670 to the Eugene Code, 1971 <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson introduced City Engineer Les Lyle to make the staff presentation. Mr. Lyle introduced <br />Carol Heinkel from the Lane Council of Governments and Therese VValch from Public Works <br />Engineering Division, both of whom helped to put the ordinance concerning key waterways <br />together. <br /> <br />Mr. Lyle used a Powerpoint presentation to review with the councilors the handout titled Key <br />Storm Waterways. He noted that one of the Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan <br />(CSWMP) goals was to address community need for flood protection, stormwater water quality, <br />and related natural resources protection. In order to meet that goal, Mr. Lyle said that the <br />proposal identified key storm waterways, clarified which waterways would remain open and be a <br />part of the stormwater system, and enhanced authority for protecting key waterways. He <br />continued with the presentation with an overview of the following issues: <br /> <br /> · The multiple benefits of waterways <br /> · Other policies impacted and supported by this proposal <br /> · Criteria for identifying key waterways <br /> · Strategy to protect key storm waterways <br /> · Example waterways meeting key waterway criteria <br /> · Example waterways not meeting key waterway criteria <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 27, 1999 Page 7 <br /> 5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />