CCMinutes - 02/23/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council, LTD Board, and Planning Commission, considered the sections of the corridor and evaluated options. She said the study was not a recommendation; it presented a number of viewpoints and a fair analysis of the complications of a Coburg Road route. She indicated that a major factor in the initial selection of Coburg Road was that it linked the first two corridors to create a full cycle BRT system. Mr. Poling acknowledged a number of stakeholder group members who were in the audience and described the year-long process through which the group had gone. He said the process was challenging and there were a number of areas of disagreement. In particular, he said, the group discussed the physical constriction of the lower part of Coburg Road and the City's requirements for redevelopment setbacks, which would create major impacts on businesses in order to accommodate BRT. He said another concern was the impact on left-turn access to both commercial properties and neighborhoods. He expressed some disappointment that the group did not make a recommendation on the Coburg Road route or an alternative route. He said there was also some discussion of BRT ;;lite" on the lower end of Coburg Road that would not require a dedicated lane, but acknowledged that the council supported BRT that would have a dedicated lane for a majority of the route. Ms. Hocken stated that LTD's long-range financial plan matched resources to the timeframe during which they would be spent. She said LTD received both capital funds that required a local match and earmarked funds, and it was earmarked funds that would be used for the Franklin Corridor. She said that earmarked funds were requested for the Pioneer Parkway Corridor as well. She indicated that it was unlikely funds would also be provided for the Coburg Road Corridor and even if they were, accumulating the local match was unrealistic. She said the next funding opportunity would occur in six years and therefore construction was not contemplated until 2010, with the route in service in 2012. Ms. Wylie said construction of the Springfield Station was well underway and the shape and form of the facility were very visible. She commented that the station would be a beautiful addition to the system and a reminder of the Phase I BRT connection between downtown Eugene and downtown Springfield. Mr. Pap6 said it was his understanding that the BRT pilot corridor on Franklin Boulevard would go into service and be evaluated during a test period before any additional corridors were considered, but it now appeared that Phase II was moving forward. Ms. Hocken agreed that Mr. Pap6's perception was correct, and said the reason LTD had moved forward in Springfield was because of the opportunity presented by the Pioneer Parkway extension and road construction and the Springfield City Council's interest in having BRT be a part of the new construction and planning for the PeaceHealth facility. Mr. Pap6 asked if the Springfield corridor could stand alone. Ms. Hocken replied that it would work better with the Eugene loop, but it could work by itself so delaying the next corridor was not an impediment to moving forward with the Springfield corridor. Mr. Pap6 asked if funding was available for the pilot corridor and if the BRT vehicles were a reality. Ms. Hocken replied that the pilot corridor funding was in place and that New Flyer, the BRT vehicle manufac- turer, had a hybrid vehicle similar to the BRT vehicle design that was in operation in the Seattle transit system. She said the new design aspects of LTD's BRT vehicle were the left-side doors, a larger size, and a guidance system. She said the 60-foot standard articulated buses recently purchased by LTD were similar in feel to the BRT vehicle. Mr. Hamm added that New Flyer produced the standard articulated buses and also produced hybrid electric-powered vehicles and test results were so good that Seattle had just ordered 200 of the vehicles. He said the guidance system was still being tested at the University of California- MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 23, 2004 Page 3 Work Session