Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Sessions noted that approximately two-thirds and as much as 80 percent of the vehicles traveling from either the Glenwood or Franklin interchange were traveling to and from Eugene. He said that whether the actual concrete was in the City’s jurisdiction, the destinations people were traveling to have overwhelmingly been Eugene destinations. Ms. Taylor asked why the City should study a problem that did not exist. She questioned what had been spent on the issue to date. Mr. Boyatt said that ODOT had spent about $180,000 on the process. Ms. Taylor asked if Mr. Boyatt would say the money was spent for nothing. Mr. Boyatt said he would not say that. He thought it was important to explore community questions when they arose. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, Ms. Gardner said the City had a Congressional earmark of $400,000 that required a ten-percent match. Staff was recommending the City pay half of the ten percent and that Springfield pay the other half. Ms. Taylor wanted to know if the study could be limited to the Glenwood interchange. Ms. Gardner did not know, pointing out that Eugene was the first of the three jurisdictions that would consider the issue. Ms. Taylor indicated that she would likely vote against the motion as she did not want to waste taxpayer money, no matter the source. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to extend time for the item by five minutes. Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to approve the continued study of the I-5 at Franklin interchange (including I-5 at Glenwood) with a refinement planning process, with a financial contribution for the local match of federal funds up to $20,000. Ms. Ortiz said that she found it amazing that the City could not use the federal earmark to address the actual transportation problems that existed. She said that $400,000 was a lot of money to study improvements that the community might not be affordable down the road. Mr. Kelly thanked Ms. Lee for her remarks about collaboration on signage and hoped that City staff followed up. Mr. Kelly thought it reasonable to say there were no State issues involved, but there were local transporta- tion issues as well as community development issues for the council to consider. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend the motion to add a sentence that said “The refinement planning process shall not include consideration of additional ramps across the Willamette River.” Mr. Kelly said the motion would still allow for consideration of both interchanges and could even include an examination of a new structure at I-5 and Franklin Boulevard that did not affect the river. Mr. Poling did not want to limit the study but based on the community input ODOT received he would support the amendment. The amendment to the motion passed, 7:1; Mr. Papé voting no. Mr. Papé advocated for a study of signage throughout the State system. MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 15, 2006 Page 8 Work Session