Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/10/1978 Meeting - e e MINUTES EUGENE CITY COUNCIL May 10, 1978 Adjourned meeting from May 8, 1978, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 11:30 a.m., on May 10, 1978, King's Table, Oakway Mall, with the following Councilors present: D. W. Hamel, Tom Williams, Eric Haws, Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, and Betty Smith. Councilor Ray Bradley was absent. I. Items from Mayor and Council A. Agenda Adjustment--Mayor Keller noted Council would attempt to con- sider all agenda items prior to 12:30 p.m., at which time the work session on T-2000 would be conducted for an hour. B. Systems Development Tax--Mr. Obie said at a recent JHC meeting, the Committee was informed that local lending institutions would treat the tax as an up-front charge (a lien). Therefore, he was prepared to make a motion for reconsideration, with a presentation by Betty Ni ven . Mr. Haws asked if there were a written report from JHC. He expressed discontent with a Councilor coming before Council at this time making motions on issues without having information on the issue. Mr. Haws requested, seconded by Mr. Delay, to hold the item over for discussion to the following Wednesday meeting. Mr. Obie objected, as there was no motion on the table. Mr. Haws responded he was asking that consideration of this item be set over. Joyce Benjamin, City Attrorney, said it would be appropriate for Mr. Obie to finish his statement and then entertain a motion to hold the item over. Mayor Keller ruled Mr. Obie could make a statement. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to reconsider at the meet- ing May 22, 1978, the vote taken at the Council meeting April 24, to finally adopt CB 1592 (Ordinance 18170) regarding the Systems Development Tax. Mr. Haws again requested that the item be set over, saying he preferred to have information before the item is discussed. 5/10/78--1 3"10 Assistant Manager, attempting to clear up the process, explained Mr. Obie had presented a motion which Council can, by the request of two Councilors, set over to the next Monday meeting, which would be. May 22. At that time, Council would consider the motion to recon- sider; or Council could now vote on the motion to reconsider and set over discussion of the SDT for the next Monday meeting. By request of two Councilors, Ms. Benjamin said the discussion for reconsideration of the motion was set for May 22. Council would then have materials in advance and could have a full discussion on reconsideration. Because two Councilors had requested that it be held over, it would not be appropriate for any further remarks addressing the issue at this time. Ms. Betty Niven, Chairman JHC, could submit her written report to Council for consideration May 22. The motion to reconsider would be the first item discussed May 22. Whether or not the merits of the Systems Development Tax would be discussed would depend on result of the vote to reconsider. C. Willakenzie Neighborhood Association--Mr. Hamel reported at a meeting held Tuesday evening, the association had divided into two new neigh- borhood groups: One located east of Coburg Road; and one located west of Coburg Road. Both would extend from Beltline north to the city limits. Mr. Delay expressed concern regarding the increased number of neighborhood groups in view of the budget limitations. D. Panhandle Committee Meeting--Mr. Hamel noted the meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, May 10. Therefore, he would not be attending the Budget Committee meeting. E. Community School Advisory Committee--Mayor Keller had requested several weeks ago suggestions from Council for appointment, and had received no response. He said if Council did not respond in the next week, he would go ahead and make the appointment. Mr. Haws noted that he had 20 names to submit, but was not in School District 4-J. F. Agenda Adjustment--Manager noted the bond bid awards scheduled at the end of the Agenda had been completed and would be available before 12:30 p.m. They would be considered after Item V. G. Budget Committee Meeting--Scheduled Wednesday, May 10, 7:30 p.m. It was the hope of Chairman Richard Hanson that the Budget Commit- tee would complete its work at this meeting. H. Tax Revenue Information--Manager noted distribution of a memo in response to Mr. Haws request for same. I. Lane Transit District--Manager distributed to Council a letter from Daniel Herbert, President, Board of Directors, requesting support for the ballot measure for LTD at the May 23 primary. Mr. Haws requested this be scheduled as an Agenda item for Wednesday, May 17. . 5/10/78--2 3~1 . - -- - J. International Association of Firefighters Wage Agreement--N~ws and letter from Personnel distributed indicating a wage agreement of 7.5 percent for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1978. Manager said this was the third and last city-union agreement for this year. K. MAPAC--As directed by Council, Manager's office had contacted Eleanor Mulder, who was interested in reappointment. Mr. Obie wondered Whether this was a legal or policy procedure regarding taking citizen interest forms and interviewing. Manager said it was mostly a policy procedure that was followed. . Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to reappoint Eleanor Mulder to MAPAC for a three~year term ending 6-30-81. Mr. Delay spoke to her experience and background on the Committee, and willingness to serve. Mr. Williams said he had no particular objection to reappointing her. However, he did have some concern about how it was decided when and when not to use the policy state- ment to take citizen interest forms and to interview applicants. If Council were going to carry out the policy, it should do so on a consistent basis. e Mayor Keller noted there were several ways Council could appoint: 1) Reappointment; 2) designate the Vice President and President of Council to appoint; or 3) take interest forms and advertise for interviews. He felt this was not a drastic change from past policies, and noted Ms. Mulder had been a good member of the Committee. Mr. Hamel had not made the motion because he did not know what the feeling of Council would be in the matter of reappointment. Mr. Obie did not recall Council having reappointed in this manner in the past. If there had been a procedure established, he felt following that procedure would avoid this confusion. Mayor Keller said the other side of the coin could be to advertise for 50 applicants on false pretense, and then go ahead and reappoint the encumbent. He felt that would serve no useful purpose. Mr. Williams again said he had no objection to reappointment.How- ever, he noted the liberal-conservative split among the Councilors. He said if Council were going to reappoint liberals without following previous procedures, then it should do so with conservatives. However, Council should make that decision and then be consistent. Mr. Delay took issue with the liberal-conservative description, noting Committee members had not been surveyed and classified. He also noted the subject had been brought up a week ago, and Council had directed City Manager staff to check with Ms. Mulder about reappointment. He noted there was no further discussion at that time about advertising for additional applicants. Vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. e 5/10/78--3 3~2 II. Intergovernmental Tax Study Request for Proposal Letter and memo distributed. Manager said the task force, comprised 4It of Finance staff, administrators, and mayors and commissioners of Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene had been meeting on the tax issue. It was concluded that defining the study and subjects to be considered, along with parameters, was' extremely complex. The Bureau of Governmental Research, University of Oregon, could do a preliminary review of the matter, define issues, develop substance of a request for proposals, and estimate study costs. That information would be brought back to the Committee for reference to the various governing bodies. The Bureau study would provide more precise information, at an estimated cost of $2,000. The cost would be shared on the basis of population of those participating, with Eugene's share between $800 and $850. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to authorize pro- ceeding with the study by the Bureau of Governmental Research. Motion carried unanimously. III. Public Hearing: Easement Vacation (Idea Builders) (EV 77-7) Unanimously recommended by Planning Commission February 27, 1978. Jim Saul, Planner, said the easement was established at the time of subdivis- ion and it had been requested by Pacific Northwest Bell. However, the various utility companies located all their facilities at the rear of the lots; consequently, this easement was not used. Because all utilities are in, there is no need to retain the easement, and staff recommends its vacation. e. Public hearing was opened. AllenD. Genault, repesenting Idea Builders, said they had checked with the people in the area, and there are no lines located in that area. They would like to have the easement vacated. Public hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. C.B. 1678--Authorizing easement vacation located south of Murnane Street between Echo Hollow Road and Juhl Street, was read by council bill number and title only, there being no Councilor present requesting it be read in full. . Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the bill be read the second time by council Bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll-call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18180. - 5/10/78--4 3&#3 e IV. Liquor License Applications A. Annual Renewal of Applications (List attached) Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to approve the renewal applications. Motion carried unanimously. B. Change of Ownership: Stadium Club, 375 East 7th; from H. Casady to Wian, Inc., (Steve Hessel); RMB license. c. Adding Partners: 7-Eleven #19206, 205 East 18th (PS), adding Donald Lee and Carma Jean Herbison. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to forward with approval to OLCC. Motion carried unanimously. IV. Authorizing Sale of GO Improvement Bonds (Bids Opened 5-10-78 at 10 a.m.) e ~Ianager said the results of the bond sale bid openings were very favor- able, and very close. Richard D. Roberts, Ragen, Roberts, and O'Scannlian, Portland, Oregon, said the results of the bid openings indicated the excellent credit the City of Eugene enjoys. Bidders were from allover the United States. He noted the National Bond Index for an average of 20 firms was 5.98 percent. Most of the bids for Eugene were from 4.9 to 5 percent. This also indi- cated the very attractive credit this city has to offer. Mr. Lieuallen requested clarification as to the meaning of net effective interest rate. Sherm Flogstad, Finance Director, explained there was a net effective rate and a true interest rate. Net effective rate is interest calculated without using a time differential, while true interest rate was calculated over a period of time. The net effective rate would be the one used by banking institutions as reported in various financial reports. Res. No. 2901 -- Awarding sale of GO Bancroft Improvement Bonds in the principal Qmount of $3,125,000 to U.s. National Bank of Oregon at a net interest cost of $866,875, net effec- tive interest rate of 4.9536 percent was read by number and title. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote. Motion carried unanimously. Res. No. 2902 -- Awarding sale of GO Airport Development Bonds, Series 1978, in the principal amount of $500,000 to Continental Illinois National Bank at a net interest cost of $137,650, net effective interest rate of 5.0055 percent was read by number and title. ,r1r. Hamel moved, serondad by Mr.. Delay, to' adoot the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. - 5/10/78--5 3'1'" Res. No. 2903 ...- Awarding sale of GO Street and Sewer Projects, 1978 Bonds, in the principal amount of $1,000,000 to United California Bank at a net interest cost of $269,983, net effective interest rate of 4.9088~was read by number and e title. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote~ Motion carred unanimously. VI. Approval of Minutes Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to approve Council Minutes May 3, 1978. Roll call vote. . Motion carried unanimously. A short recess was taken. VII. T-2000 Plan: Wo~k Session Jim Fara~, Planner, responded to questions raised regarding the south... bound traffic on arterials, especially south of 18th. Comparisons had been made of the north-south street volumes as follows: NORTH...SOUTH STREET VOLUMES Location ,. . Year 1977 Year 2000 Capacity Improvements North of 18th Chambers 11 ,200 14,900 Widen and improve inter... section at 18th None...(18th...19th couplet will improve traffic flow) Improve intersection at 18th e Willamette/Oak/ Pearl/High 18th to 24th Chambers 30,600 35,500 10 , 900 15,100 Wi 11 amette/ Amazon Parkway/ Hilyard/Patterson 39,700 42,800 Improve intersections of 24th and Willamette and Amazon Park South of.30th Willamette/Hilyard Improve intersection at 30th and Hilyard He noted the relationship of transportation planning to land use. The major volumes anticipated for the years ahead will be for the west and south areas of the city, where the major growth will take place. 33,300 45,400 Mayor Keller noted the increase south of 30th Street seemed to be rather substantial. Mr. Farah responded that was correct, that it was felt the improvement to the intersection at 30th and Hi lyard to be very impor... tant,and one of the major ways to prevent Service Level E from occurring in that area. e 5/10/78......6 3'i5 . Mr. Delay wondered if the improvement at the Franklin/Hilyard/Patterson intersection would be projecting an increase in the arterial north of Hilyard/Patterson couplet. Mr. Farah responded he did not believe so. The kind of function of the street would be the same, that is, carrying through traffic. The primary problem is at the intersection. Dave Reinhard, Planning Engineer, said the volume of traffic on High Street is not projected to increase substantially between 19th and 30th. The proposal from 13th to Broadway comes about as a function of the University of Oregon and Sacred Heart traffic going northbound through those intersections. Regarding the increase of traffic on Hilyard north of 30th, Mr. Lieuallen wondered if the intersection at 30th and Hilyard is projected to carry an increased capacity. Mr. Farah said in work on the West University Plan, volume counts have shown some decrease in the arterials near the University of Oregon. This suggests alternative modes are being used. Mr. Lieuallen was curious about the intersection capacity at 30th and . Hilyard. Mr. Reinhard said the significant figures were the combined growth on Willamette/Hilyard south of 30th (an increase of 33,000 to 45,000). The figures are assuming a substantial modal split using those north/south streets. e Mr. Lieuallen questioned why there was projected 12,000 car increase south of that intersection, and only 3,000 increase north. Manager said many bypass the center of the city by turning at the intersection to go to Springfield, Interstate 5, and are going out 30th. Mr. Farah said there was a funneling effect being seen at that intersection with the traffic dispersing east from Willamette, west on 24th, etc. At 29th there are only two major arterials carrying traffic, and it is collected at those funnel points. Mr. Delay wondered if this was assuming use of the 30-30 Connector to add as an attracter to encourage use of 30th. Mr. Reinhard said the figures include the 30-30 Connector. However, figures had been collected without that facility, and they were not that much different (perhaps a few thousand). Regarding the nature of the modal split from the South Hills to the University or downtown area, Mr. Lieuallen wondered why people were riding the buses to their employment centers at a higher rate than other parts of the city. Ollie Snowden, L-COG, said specific calculations on the South Hills was not done, but rather on major corridors (i.e., Ferry Street Bridge, Franklin Boulevard). Traffic that goes through 30th and Hilyard mi ght carry a hi qher percentage of tri ps on buses than a city-wi de average. Mr. Farah noted that the other end of the trip (the downtown area) about 37 percent of the downtown work trips . would be on public transit. Mr. Lieuallen wondered what reasons were that that particular residential area used a higher rate of mass transit. Mr. Farah said the model is not saying people are taking the bus because, for instance, they live in a hi ghri se apartment. But the model is used as a tool to project traffic, not for making decisions for peof:Jlrei in the future. The kinds of trips taken and e 5/10/78--7 3 '-16 nature of locations of employment are important to consider. It is anticipated the downtown to continue to be a stronger attractor of ~ employment trips. The model is responding to those things that have . been plugged in. The main reason people might ride the bus is it is more convenient, there would be no parking problem at the other end of the trip, and transportation has become more expensive than housing. Mr. Snowdon said the transit split was a given. The modeling done after that reflected where people desire to go using their autos. TPC tried to look at where the general ridership patterns are today, and proportionately increase those until they reached 14-15 percent modal split for Eugene. The downtown area is such a strong attraction in terms of jobs, and people from the South Hills area are oriented to the white collar businesses located in the downtown area. Mr. Farah said the plan anticipates a goal of five-percent bike rider- ship. Also, TPC is making a statement that bike ridership is very important, and should be encouraged through suggestions from the Eugene Bicycle Committee. It suggests that work be continued through the Bicycle Committee as part of Metro Bikeway Plan. Mr. Obie wondered how, in the procedure, Council would come to grips with the mass transit goal. Mr. Farah said the policy, as drafted, includes wording for Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene. As the City Council moves for action, it is acting only for the City of Eugene and suggested wording that would embody a metro-wide plan. James Bernhard, President, Planning Commission, reviewed for Council the various policies and changes made by the Planning Commission. He called to the Council's attention the importance of the land-use issues involved. He said some were existing and should be reinforced; others are amended and should be dealt with at the time of the update. However, it was felt there should be a strong official commitment to the update process. The Planning Commission recommended major review be done every five years, with continued update yearly. . Mr. Farah noted the policies are an important part of the plan as those policies would be used by Council in making decisions regarding transpor- tation in the coming years. Mr. Obie referred to the section on page 21, item I, A and B, regarding major new commercial development in the downtown area. He wondered if that policy might create more transportation problems than it solves. Mr. Snowdon said it was felt this policy inclusion would be one of the most effective ways of encouraging transit ridership. Potentially, if transit ridership is not achieved, wi:th concentration of much of the development in the downtown area, it is not effective to serve that type of concentrated development by the automobile. Mr. Porter said that particular item referred to by Mr. Obie should be read in context with the one on page 22, numbered 4. He said those combined are encouraging City goals directed toward the central area as it is felt to be the heart - 5/10/78--8 3&+1 - of the city as far as a whole series of issues are concerned. There are other places for retail development outside the downtown area. It is hoped the plan will encourage placement of the shopping and employ- ment centers closer to where people live. However, it does recognize the downtown area as a unique part of the city which has something for everyone. However, that is not to say satellite communities are not important. He cautioned Council could not just isolate one area, but had to look at all areas in making transportation decisions. Mr. Delay did not like the idea of facility tolls. He felt Mr. Bernhard said the Planning Commission was not happy with the idea of diversion of traffic as a goal, and requested a comment from Mr. Bernhard on that. Mr. Bernhard said the Commission took the example of establishing tolls on the Ferry Street Bridge at peak hours, and examined how it would affect the transportation corridors, and how it would affect the transit ridership. Regarding the transportation corridors, it would overload them; regarding transit ridership, it would increase. He said tolls should not be used to force people to use buses. Regarding the diversion aspect, Mr. Delay said he was not sure that was not a good goal as it would spread the capacity across existing facili- ties. Mr. Bernhard said the diversion was one thing; however, he wondered if it was necessary to go with a toll facility. It was the Commission's feeling that diversion was already in existence (i.e., 30th and Hilyard). e Mr. Delay asked, forgetting the toll as a vehicle, why was the diversion policy in the plan? He wondered if there was better mechanism to accom- modate the projected increased capacity. Mr. Farah said the diversion policy was an attempt to encourage transit ridership, carpooling, etc. It was not intended to be a dispersal tool. The intent of the whole plan was not to disperse traffic but to try to accommodate traffic projections on arterial facilities as opposed to having them use residential areas. Mr. Porter said the problem with the proposal regarding tolls was that everyone had a different version as to how tolls would work. Staff had not adequate research and information when it was presented to the Planning Commission. Personally, he felt it could work as a positive tool if it were worked out properly. He felt it was something that should be looked at at a later time. Regarding diversion, Mr. Snowdon said there would be diversion occur- ring from Ferry Street Bridge to 1-105, based on increasing congestion on the bridge. In terms of the traffic growth, there was no way to handle the traffic and avoid service level E without adding capacity to Ferry Street Bridge. Regarding the toll, Mr. Williams wondered, rather than viewing it as a policy system, how much consideration had been given to using it as a financing system. Mr. Bernhard said it was discussed at great length. Questions that arose if it were used were: What kind of land use would exist, how would it affect land use, and would the toll be equal for e 5/10/78--9 ~8 e~e~~body in the city. Mr. Porter noted a recent use of a toll system in Berkeley, California, made it very unattractive for people wanting to go ~ into the central area. He noted Eugene's Planning Commission wanted to make the plan positive rather than negative actions. Mr. Delay spoke to policy No. 49, noting he would like to delete the wording regarding users' fees for bikes. He felt people should be encouraged to use bikes, and noted the small amount of money put into bike systems ($75,000), compared to the amount of money invested in streets (millions). He felt it suggested that bike riders were not paying their way and he felt just the opposite was true. Mayor Keller noted the Bike Committee' had looked at such a fee for several years. He himself did not find it offensive, as a licensing policy might help in policing. Mr. Delay said it did not address the issue of licensing, but was a users I fee as a source of revenue for facil i ti es. He fel t there could be licensing fees, but did not think there was a need for a users' fee to support the meager investment made in the bike system. Mr. Bernhard agreed with Mr. Delay. Bike facilities should be financed with highway funds. He said much discussion had taken place and this policy was placed in the plan because it related to providing locked, lighted bike facilities in all public and community facilities. Therefore, the users' fee would be used for that reason, and not for pathways, etc. Mr. Haws left the meeting. Mr. Obie felt if better facilities were provided, it might increase the ~ bicycle ridership. Mr. Delay did not view the users' fee on bike riders as a practical source of major revenue. Mr. Lieuallen felt that the facilities could come from private resources and should be voluntary efforts. He thought it would be a fee that would be hard to collect, woul d not generate that much money, and woul d create ill will. Hewoul d rather see it not mandated by the local government, but left to voluntary efforts, which he felt would be forthcoming. Ms. Smith felt the policy was stating that new revenues could come from a users' fee and as such should be investigated. She wondered about the amount of time Council was spending considering this issue, as she had no problem in accepting the Commission's recommendation. Mayor Keller said if the City were consistent regarding users' fee, it could be constructive. It would be an equitable way of paying for services that the community is asking for. Mr. Delay moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, to delete in Policy Section No. 49, unedr "Di scussion", the words added by the Planning Commission relating to a bike user's fee as a source of revenue. Mr. Hamel spoke in favor of the motion. He said if the need for a fee for bike users should come up later, it could be dealt with at that time. e 5/10/78--10 3LfC/ - Mr. Williams opposed the motion. He felt substantial money was being spent on bikes, noting the bike paths and lanes marked off in the street system. He felt the amount would be more than the $75,000 Mr. Delay referred to earlier. He felt to reject the concept of attempting to use fees for bikes any more than for autos seemed to be inappropriate. Mr. Delay did not suggest the concept be categorically rejected. He felt it was not serious or fruitful at this time. Also, he felt the financing comparison he had used earlier was correct, noting it was dealing with local funds as a comparison. Vote was taken on the motion, which was defeated, with Delay, Lieuallen, and Hamel voting aye; Smith, Obie, and Williams voting no; and Mayor Keller voting no to break the tie. Mayor Keller felt it to be a portion of the transportation plan and felt it did not imply any negative impact on bike riders. It would provide an alternative source for financing. - Mayor Keller questioned policy No.9, as to how it was arrived at. Mr. Farah said in a state of chaos! TPC felt that if it was trying to build the most effective transportation system, that is building facilities and preventing service level E, that arterial streets and traffic capacities that might be gained from removing parking on arterial streets to be a key. The first function of arterial streets would be to carry through traffic, with parking as a secondary function. Removal of parking would allow gains for greater 'capacity. Assistant Manager noted this was a statement of a long-standing City policy. Mayor Keller then wondered where the bike paths would fit in. Mr. Farah said the plan was an attempt to provide for movement of people by increasing capacity through use of all modes of transit, even use of sidewalks. Mr. Obie wondered, in light of the City.s apparent move in the direction of potentially reducing minimum lot size and allowing more on-street parking, whether these would be in conflict with this goal. Assistant Manager said there was a balancing effect already ongoing. This plan would be dealing with arterials as distinguised from residential streets. He noted there would always be areas of policy conflicts which would need to be resolved on a case-by-case basis. Manager noted the Council would be in a jOint meeting May 18 with the other jurisdictions. Part of the effort would be to arrive at tentative agreement today, or at least prior to that meeting. Following that joint meeting, there will be further discussion and, hopefully, final adoption. Mr. Hamel moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to tentatively adopt the Policies for the T-2000 Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. e 5/10/78--11 350 I ,. Mr. Li euallen requested that staff present information to the Council, outside the context of the T-2000 Plan, regarding some proposals for ~ action attempti ng to all evi ate probl ems, specifically the 6th/7th avenues, ., 8th Avenue, and Washington/Jefferson/Lincoln couplet (the overall corridor problem). Specifically, he was concerned about the WOW Hall and an interim solution to the Washington/Jefferson Street problem. He was concerned about maintaining the basic character of that neighborhood. He requested assent from the Council to continue looking at those problems. He complimented staff on the work it had been doing and felt staff . 'to be capabl~ in coming up with some resourceful solutions. Regarding the Pri'nciples Section of the plan, Mr. Porter said there were alternatives in managing the various jurisdictional differences as the plan progressed toward the year 2000. He suggested again to Council that it concentrate on the five-year program that could be agreed upon by the three juri sdi cti ons. If any of the programs were substanti ally changed., the entire plan would have to recycled. However, they can be adjusted somewhat. Ms. Smith wondered what the consequences might be if mutual agreement were not reached by the three jurisdictions. Mr. Porter thought in actuality the three jurisdictions would be able to agree for the' next five years quite easily. There will be a major update in five years. He said there were many uncertainties in transportation with the federal government, state government, and local government. The Plan was created as best as possible, given these uncertainties, for the next 20 years. He again reiterated for Council these are goals, not fixed policies. He ~ felt Council should try to keep the jurisdictions together for the first five years of the plan. He noted there would be many things in the Plan with which individuals in three jurisdictions might not agree, and those should be noted as high priorities for the yearly reviews and five-year upda te . Ms. Smith then wondered what changes might have to be made for the three jurisdictions to agree in five years. Mr. Farah replied the key would be setting a direction now to bring it together in five years, that an agreement on a metro-wide transit goal should be reached in the next five years. That would address the differences that perhaps might be seen ljy the three jurisdictions. He said this is a beginning point, and continued work would be ongoing. One big portion of that work would be to bring the goal s together. Regarding the transit usage (item No.4), Mr. Obie said he had not been provided with information that a IS-percent goal would be reasonable. He did not want to pursue an unreasonable objective. He understood there was a two- to three-percent usage now, which has taken ten to 15 years to reach. He though perhaps over the next 20 years, it could be expected the percentage would increase a little more. He felt an objective of less than ten percent and more than five percent would be a reasonable one for Eugene to approach. e 5110/78--12 351 - Mr. Williams responded it is impossible to answer the question. Council was dealing in a situation in which it did not know how much energy would be available or the state of automobile technology, or what personal transit vehicles will be used 20 years from now. There will be massive societal changes that could effect the Plan, which are difficult to determine at this time. Mayor Keller said the biggest key to the problem would be the five-year update. e Mr. Obie wondered if consideration was given to developing incremental goals. Mr. Porter said part of the decision in reaching the 15 percent goal was the rationale of trying to get people to use modes of transpor- tation other than single-ridership automobiles. He said it had to be looked at more in a philosophical way, as it was not known how to reach 15-percent goal from the current two to three percent. He said it was a philosophy that it would be better if the community were not completely relying on automobile transportation by the year 2000. Mr. Allen said the only consolation he could give is that in the process of reaching this goal, there had been many bodies strewn along the way of reduci ng the goal down to 15 percent from 100 percent. . Mr. Obie then wondered if it might be better to use some language that forgot about specific percentages and talked about where Council is trying to go and what it is trying to do, thereby eliminating the controversy of the percentage transit goal. Mr. Porter said technologically, a percen- tage is needed for modeling for facilities over a considerable time frame. He thought the 15 percent goal for the City of Eugene to be a proper one model for future transportation systems. If the 15 percent predicted goal were not used, there would be considerable difference in the facilities that were being proposed for the year 2000. Mr. Farah said if in 1985, there were a four-percent transit ridership, the same alignments regarding facilities to handle greater capacity would be recommended by staff. Mr. Delay reiterated one of the greatest assets of the plan was the way it defers capital investments, noting it was really buying time. Mr. Obie did not think it was buying time. He felt it was creating a potential of forcing people out of their cars because they could not use the streets because of congestion. He did not think that to be good transportation planning. Mr. Delay did not feel staff was reflecting Mr. Obie's comments in this Plan, but rather recommending a plan to avoid service level E. e Mr. Williams reminded Council of the lack of funding for the Plan, noting the lack of money for present street programs. He felt the whole concept of the plan was a farce as there was no money with which to build it. Mr. Allen felt the staff was in error in leading Council through the exerci se because it mi ght go on and on until money was found to buil d it. He noted the City was the lowest level for financing. If the Federal and State have no money, the City's chances of raising it were pretty slim. There are many projects which need to be done, but the funding capability simply is not there. However, he felt the City was doing a good job of planning within its means. 5/10/78-13 352. t Mr. Porter fel t the Eugene communi ty was creative enough to deal with the plan, and could find solutions. He saw it as exciting transportation ~ planning. He noted changes were coming that were necessary for the .., community to plan for, and he felt it could be done in a creative manner. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned to May 17, 1978. ~~~ Ci ty Manager DT:so/CM7a1 e - 5/10/78--14 353