Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Poling ascertained from Mr. Inerfeld that the estimated cost for the West Bank Bike Path was for the <br />total project cost. He asked how long the projects that were being recommended for submission had been <br />in the project list. Mr. Schoening responded that the bike path had been in the project list for four to five <br />years. He said Coburg Road had been part of the $170 million backlog of pavement preservation projects <br />and had come into the STP -U process because of the road's regional significance. <br />Mr. Poling questioned whether moving forward with the West Bank Bike Path extension would take such a <br />big bite out of the STP -U funding that it would preclude other funds for the projects that other agencies <br />were submitting for funding. Mr. Inerfeld responded that the City of Eugene would probably not get what <br />was requested, but staff hoped that the City would receive at least $800,000 out of the $1.6 million <br />requested. He reiterated staff's feeling that the project would compete well. <br />Mr. Poling was concerned that if Eugene received all that it asked for, there would be nothing left for the <br />other agencies. He was also concerned that receiving substantially less than was asked for would hinder <br />the City's ability to complete the projects. Mr. Inerfeld replied that he believed staff could come up with <br />ways to phase the project or find other sources of funding. He said to keep in mind that Springfield had <br />received more than Eugene in the last round, as it had received $1.7 million for Gateway /Beltline projects. <br />He underscored that the funding was not necessarily distributed according to population or street miles. <br />In response to Mr. Brown, Mr. Inerfeld explained that Transportation Options (TO) had to do with <br />Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and the ten percent of STP -U that was allocated to TO <br />funding went to Point2Point Solutions, formerly known as Commuter Solutions, which promoted car <br />pooling and ridesharing and signed up employers for LTD's group pass program, among others. <br />Mr. Brown asked if the grant fund money allocated from the Transportation Enhancements (TE) program <br />had been saved or if it had been spent on work on the bike path to date. Mr. Inerfeld replied that it was <br />couched in the design and engineering costs. <br />Mr. Brown ascertained from Mr. Inerfeld that the total cost of the project was $2.2 million. Mr. Inerfeld <br />added that there would also be a local match for it. Mr. Brown asked if the City had already received the <br />TE money. Mr. Inerfeld explained that the money had been allocated but not received; the City was <br />required by the federal government to provide a local match of 11 percent of the cost in addition to the $2.2 <br />million, slated to come from Systems Development Charges (SDCs). <br />Mr. Clark underscored that he did not want anyone to misinterpret his question. He observed, in looking at <br />the map, that his constituents stood to benefit from the three recommended projects. He questioned why, in <br />a time when there were such limited federal funds, 60 percent of the funding was being requested to be <br />allocated to bicycle projects when there was such a great need to fix the roads. Mr. Inerfeld <br />replied that the council had the option to put forward the Coburg Road project. He pointed out that the <br />City had just allocated $3 million, of the $6 million received in economic stimulus funds, to pavement <br />preservation. He thought the City had done well with that. He added that part of staff's job was to <br />consider their charge, which was to create a multi -modal transportation system and to address the backlog <br />of road projects. He considered this to be a balancing act. He underscored staff's belief that if the bicycle <br />path project was moved forward, it would position the City well to receive TE funds in the next round for <br />another project they would put forward. He stated that staff's goal was to be as competitive as possible for <br />any available funding from the federal government, so that the City could spend as few local dollars as <br />possible and get as much state and federal funding for projects as possible. He believed that this could free <br />up more local dollars to be spent on pavement preservation. <br />MINUTES— Eugene City Council July 8, 2009 Page 7 <br />Work Session <br />