Item A: West Eugene EmX Update - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Alternative (5MC) be forwarded along with the No Build Alternative into the federal environmental review process for further analysis. LTD would incorporate mitigation measures identified through subsequent analysis. Mr. Pryor amended the motion to include mitigation measures B, C and L. Ms. Ortiz accepted the second to the motion. The motion passed 7:1, with Mr. Evans, Mr. Eyster, Mr. Chickering, Mr. Leiken, Ms. Ortiz, Ms. Piercy and Mr. Pryor voting in favor of the motion, and Mr. Gillespie voting against the motion. The Joint LPA Committee discussed a desire to have the Eugene City Council consider both build alternatives in the context of its land use planning deliberations. The draft “Envision Eugene: A Legacy of Livability” offers the following pillars and strategies for consideration: “Promote compact urban development and efficient transportation options.” ‐‐ 1.Meet all of the 20year multifamily housing and commercial (office and retail) lands needs within the existing UGB, through development of vacant lands and also focusing new development and redevelopment in core commercial areas, corridor areas and downtown. ‐ 2.Transform key transportation corridors and core commercial areas as mixeduse neighborhoods that foster active, walkable, community living by providing a mix of residential, commercial, ‐ retail, and public uses in close proximity to one another in many cases within a single building. Identify focus areas that are ready for change, economically viable, and poised for success. 4. Make compact urban development of core commercial areas and corridors easier. “Plan for climate and energy uncertainty.” 5. Continue City efforts to reduce greenhouse gas impacts from housing and transportation. These include development of a new Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan, collaboration with Lane Transit District (LTD) to complete the EmX bus rapid transit system, and efforts to encourage existing and new houses to be energy efficient, particularly by using solar energy. The project development process includes two decision points. The first is the current decision on selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative based on the October 2010 Alternatives Analysis and subsequent analysis. In order to remain on schedule for the remainder of the project development process, LTD is seeking approvals of the locally preferred alternative from all three decision-making bodies in March 2011. With an affirmative decision, LTD will proceed with the development of the federal environmental review process which will prompt a second decision focused on selection of either a build or no-build option. This decision would likely take place in late fall 2011. LTD will also be preparing a Small Starts grant application due to the Federal Transit Administration in late August 2011. Should the decision coming out of the environmental process be for no-build, then the submitted grant would be withdrawn. \\Cesrv500\cc support\CMO\2011 Council Agendas\M110223\S110223Aand attA.doc