Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ln response to a question from M'so Ortiz,Ml"- Schoening explained that Game Farm Rood was fairly cbse <br />to the Bdtline Highway!lnterstak 5 interchange project and the she where ODOT planned to replace <br />bridges, and because of this the City had he.enint.egrating with ODOT to ~ondlJct the projects efficiently, <br />He said the ODOTinterchange project would not affel,.~t the Game Farm Road project <br />~vfs. Taylor felt encouraged to see an ofthe presen;atlon prQjects. She viondered if there was a good <br />chance that the projects wo-uld go tln'o~lgk Mr. Schoening replied that the devcl.opment of good criteria <br />that foc~lsed on arterial and ~olledor streets could improve the chances, <br />in response to a question from. Ms. Taylor, !'vfr. Schoening assured her that the City ofE~lgene was entirely <br />responsihle for ehoos!ng which mod<:~rnization j}rQjects to submit <br />Mayor Piercy called for a second round of questions and comments. <br />T'vh Heitman caned the assertion that an external entity made the decision on what 'pn~jects to submit. <br />"nothing but pretense:' She alleged that Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County staff made the matrix and <br />chose \'vhkh projects to submit. She opined that all the elected offkia1s needed to do was to ::;ay 'no' once <br />or twice and staff would "get the mes::;age" that the policy shOUld be upheld, She approved of the list of <br />preservation proj<::cts, as that was th(~ City's highest priority. She felt there was no guarantee that staff <br />members \vould. prioritize them when they "got into that little room to m.ake the decision" unless the <br />council said that was what it wanted, <br />.fvis. Bettnmn agreed t.hat the cDuncil had adDpted the Game Farm Road project when adopting its capital <br />project list but she noted that the funding mechanism had changed, She que::;tioned the "pretend matrix." <br />Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms, Solomon, moved to approve the attached list of projects for <br />submittal of applications tor federal Surface Transportation Program-Urban funds for <br />FY()7.FY(J9 to be programmed hy the ivtetropolitan 'Policy Committee. <br />Mr. Kelly h~lt preservation projects had more chance for funding now than they had a few years earlier, <br />He &'lid ::;hould ideas held by the Tnmsporuttion Planning Committee (TPC) on h...w/ fl.lm.iing was allocated <br />remain un(:hanged, there would he a little over $5 million available for the \-vho!c region over three years. <br />He observed that be<:-ause the list ofpreservation projects being put forward totaled ov~r $8 million, it <br />would likely he "whittled aL"Mr. Schoening responded that the actual funding totaled $14 million <br />because part of the ~ritefia was that the City provided a local match to the STP..U funding, <br />Mr. Schoening said one of the reasons the list was broad \.vas that the s(:oring crit<:~r)a was uncertain at this <br />point <br />In rc::;r(}n~e to a question from Mr. Kelly. Mr, Schoening affirmed. that the federal rules prohibited the <br />MPC f1.om dividing the money up by jurisdiction because ofthe region's designation m; atranspt)r1ation <br />management area. <br />Mr. Kelly observ...."<l that the pr(~!ects c.ame from a coHectiw decision made by staff and elected officials <br />butjurisdktions were unable to take the money and use it Jndependently. He commented that \vhik he <br />saw value in the Game Farm Road prqject, he w'ould likely S~lp'pOtt Ms, Henman's intended amendment to <br />remove it from the list. lk l;al!ed this \vork "horse trading," He imagined that if Eugene did nm compete <br />t()f the "moderni7jltion pie" and Springfield received more than its fair share of that money, the. other <br />jurisdktionsmight be inclined to give Eugene more than its fair share of the preservation money, <br />MINtrfES-Eugene City Cound August 10, 2005 Page 9 <br />Work Session <br />