Laserfiche WebLink
was working with ODOT and with resource agencies to conduct a functional analysis. He said the final <br />results were not yet available from that analysis. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if one reason for the difference in quality was that the railroad tracks had run through that <br />area for years. Mr. Stiles responded that a whole spectrum of factors contributed. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé said he was open to hearing alternatives but the voters had opposed it. He recalled a charette <br />several years earlier that had reviewed alternatives and come up with no alternatives. He felt the decision <br />had been vetted very well. He opined that in killing the project without consulting the County or the City of <br />Springfield, Eugene was not being a good community partner. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé noted that the project had been cut into three phases instead of four. He asked if the couplet was <br />slated to be built in the first phase. Mr. Stiles affirmed that it would be. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asserted that the project had monopolized modernization money for as long as the project had <br />been alive. She felt this money could have been used to address safety and operational deficiencies on West <br />th <br />11 Avenue. She agreed that the council should honor the will of the voters, adding that after the vote she <br />supported the motion to move the project forward. She averred that the project being considered was now a <br />different project. She alleged that the scope had changed. She said the cost had doubled. She opined that it <br />was not the WEP anymore and there were other options. <br /> <br />Ms. Ortiz observed that there was a “lot of passion” around this issue. She related that she had spoken to <br />her constituents and they were clearly opposed to the WEP. She felt that engaging in a different process to <br />reach a level of consensus would ultimately result in a better product. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy called for the vote. <br /> <br />The vote on the motion was a 4:4 tie; Mr. Poling, Mr. Pryor, Ms. Solomon, and Mr. Papé <br />voting in favor and Mr. Kelly, Ms. Bettman, Ms. Taylor, and Ms. Ortiz voting in opposi- <br />tion; Mayor Piercy cast a vote in opposition and the motion failed on a final vote of 5:4. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct the City Manager to consult with the <br />City of Eugene’s inter-governmental partners and community organizations to commence a <br />process to design and build transportation projects in West Eugene to address congestion, <br />safety, and operation for all modes of transportation. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to table the motion. The motion failed, 5:3; Mr. <br />Poling, Ms. Solomon, and Mr. Papé voting in favor. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to extend the discussion by five minutes. The <br />motion passed, 5:3; Mr. Papé, Mr. Poling, and Ms. Solomon voting in opposition. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly observed that one of the questions the City Manager would have to answer was how to handle <br />funding of the design and build process. He averred that Mr. Pryor’s motion sought to start the process but <br />was not the process itself. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé said his major concern was that in not working with ODOT the funds were gone. He did not know <br />if the City had the ability with the budget and the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in place to even consider <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 26, 2005 Page 9 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />