Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Poling asked if money allocated to modernization projects could be reallocated to preservation projects. <br />Mr. Schoening responded that it would take an action by the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) to make <br />such a change. <br /> <br />In response to a follow-up question from Mr. Poling, Mr. Schoening explained that STP-U money allocated <br />to this modernization project would be reallocated to the next highest priority project on the list should the <br />council not approve it. Mr. Poling asked if the City of Eugene had another project for consideration on the <br />list. Mr. Schoening replied that there was no other project in the queue for this iteration of funding and <br />removal of the Game Farm Road project would release that funding for a project in another jurisdiction. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling asked if the work on the Chad Drive project, should it be approved, would be conducted in <br />conjunction with the extension work that was already approved. Mr. Schoening affirmed that the work <br />could be coordinated. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly opined that the proposal made at the MPC meeting the previous month to program only one year <br />of funding and allocate 20 percent to modernization projects was the “best the City could hope to get.” He <br />believed an attempt to lower it from there would have been a losing battle. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he was “troubled” by the Game Farm Road project. He asked Ms. Bettman if there was a <br />bigger project she would prefer or if she wished for the City to sit out this round of funding. He also wished <br />to ask staff about the money allocated for planning. He asked what fund was paying for the planning at this <br />point. Mr. Schoening replied that it came from the Road Fund moneys that went into the operating budget. <br />Mr. Kelly commented that he would prefer to lower the amount requested but did not want to “eat up” more <br />Road Fund dollars. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé concurred with concerns expressed about the Game Farm Road project. He asked why the whole <br />road was not being done and if it was not a priority for the County. Mr. Schoening assured him that the <br />other portion of the road was under construction at present by the County. He said the City’s work would <br />complete the last piece of it. He noted that ODOT was planning to replace the bridges as part of its bridge <br />replacement program and indicated a willingness to add this project as a change order. City Manager <br />Taylor added that this was one reason it scored so well and that working in tandem with ODOT and the <br />County benefited the City by helping to control costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked for clarification on why half of the road would be built to County standards and the other <br />half to City standards. Mr. Schoening stated that the pavement standards of the road would be consistent, <br />but the County side would not have a sidewalk and the drainage would be directed into the ditch rather than <br />routed with curbs and gutters. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked who developed the scoring system. Mr. Schoening said the staff of all the participating <br />agencies could develop a proposal for changing the scoring at the direction of elected officials. Mr. Papé <br />asked how a higher priority could be given for pavement preservation. Mr. Schoening explained that the <br />current criteria came from TransPlan policies and focused on alternative modes. He said the removal and <br />replacement of asphalt between the curbs had a tendency “not to score a lot of points.” <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked for a memorandum on the scoring criteria. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council August 10, 2005 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />