minhead.gif (11357 bytes)APPROVED Approved 8/4/99

May 5, 1999


Harris Hall Main Floor - 1:30 p.m.

Commissioner Bobby Green, Sr., presided with Commissioners Bill Dwyer, Anna Morrison, Peter Sorenson and Cindy Weeldreyer present. County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, County Counsel Teresa Wilson and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.


Dwyer reported that on Monday he will be in Salem.

Weeldreyer reported she will be in Portland tomorrow, attending a planning session for a regional workshop on telecommunications access for rural communities. She noted the City of Coburg asked that the Board not allow construction in the areas for both of the major entrances to their community in the same construction year, so the area wouldn’t be impacted. She asked Coburg to assure her that with the new County road construction on Willamette Street, that their wastewater project would not be damaging the new pavement. She said they assured her the wastewater would go on city streets and not the County road and the water lines had gone in as planned. She added they stated they had conflicting numbers out of the assessors office, making it difficult for them to do the budgeting process.

Sorenson reported the Human Service Commission met yesterday and is working on different things. He mentioned the Lane County Home Schoolers Association are having a session tomorrow in Harris Hall at 3:30 p.m. He reported that on Monday, May 10, as part of the National Historic Preservation Week, he will be making a presentation at the Downtown Athletic Club on the National Historic Preservation Act. He added there will be a celebration at the Wayne Morse Ranch as it is being designated on the National Register of Historic Places, on Sunday, May 16 from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Weeldreyer noted that Bob Graton is a McKenzie Valley resident who has put his time into trying to work out a community support compromise on the location of a new boat landing on the McKenzie. She stated that group met on Monday night, but she wasn’t able to make the meeting. She added the group had made recommendations that will be coming to the Board next week for action to take advantage of the application deadline for Marine Board funding.

Bob Grafton, McKenzie Valley, reported that Bob Keefer did an excellent job where there were differing views. He said the process they went through was excellent, and there was a lot of community input.

Green reported that on Monday there is a PSCC policy group that meets at 12:00 p.m. and an AOC Steering Committee Meeting with the Executive Board and the governor. He noted that today is Cinco de Mayo and there are a number of events happening in the community.

Green noted with assignments, there is a work session for Land Use Compliance, Rob Rockstroh was going to send a memo about the system as it relates to the homeless and contract monitoring and a retrieval of Senate Bill 722.

Van Vactor noted that David Suchart was going to get information on user satisfaction with regard to Directions.


a. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDER 99-5-5-19 Adopting the Public Works Five-Year Capital Improvement Program FY 99/00-FY 03/04.

Ollie Snowden, Public Works, reported the County has 440 miles of roads and 423 bridges. He said with regard to the funding, there is no property tax involved in the projects and in road funds. He said they get the sources from timber receipts and state highway user fees. He added 40% will come from highway user fees through the state. He noted that it was all state money and the only money that is not from the state user fees would be a fund exchange, where the County takes federal aid money and trades it to the state for 94 cents on a dollar. He said it is a good deal because they avoid the paper work associated with federal aid projects. He noted in the next fiscal year, 2/3 of the road fund budget goes toward operation, maintenance and preservation and 1/3 toward capital projects. He noted what the Board will see today are projects in the CIP that they will not be able to build unless they have new revenue sources or the Board changes priorities on how they are projected to spend the money they have now. He reported the Roads Advisory Committee conducted a hearing in February, 1999 and there were a number of comments orally and in writing that supported two of the projects that were already in the program (Blue River Drive and West Boundary Road) and there were comments from residents in the Harlow neighborhood who wanted the Board to modify the previous Board action regarding the loan portion of the County’s participation in the soundwall. He added there were requests for a number of new projects, Westfir Rest Area was added to the draft that is in the packet and two others, Hulbert Lake Road and Dillard Road, were added to the projects for development.

Snowden reported they looked at the Bloomberg connector project and the most likely alignment would be to realign portions of McVey Highway through the site where the armory is proposed to locate. He said they met with the representatives of the armory in January, and based on preliminary work, it would be about $300,000.

Snowden commented on Coburg Road, having been listed from the north city limits to Game Farm Road for $1.65 million. He said they hoped to build a section from Game Farm Road to Armitage Park this summer. He said they will not make it to contract this year because of right-of-way acquisition and permits. He suggested when the program is adopted, to change the limits back to North Eugene city limits to Armitage Bridge and it should be $2,850,000.

Snowden said with regard to the Delta/Beltline interchange, they go into the program in fiscal 2001 and they had consultants look at alternatives for redesigning the intersection. He said the consultants completed their preliminary report and the recommendation is to construct a set of round abouts at the interchange. He said they were hoping to go to a public review session in Spring, but there is some resistance from ODOT. He said currently they will only allow signals at that location.

Snowden noted with Division Avenue, they moved it from 2001/2002 to 2003, to get the Delta Beltline interchange reconfiguration completed and operating for a period of time before they decide to proceed with it.

Snowden reported with Game Farm Road south, it is a new project that was added and it and has merit. He said they would be looking at adding curbs, gutters and sidewalks.

Snowden noted with Jasper Extension, it had been in fiscal 98/99, but it has been moved to 99/00 and his opinion is that they will not make contract on schedule as they had not gotten a commitment from the property owners in the area to dedicate right-of-way and they can’t define the final alignment and go forward with the permitting. He said it would be unlikely to have this project out to contract in 99/00.

Snowden reported with Marcola Road, (Sunderman to Wendling Road) the Roads Advisory Committee arrived at a design concept recommendation and they will segment the project into different phases, but it is unlikely the entire project will go to contract next year.

Snowden noted another project that did not show up is Greenhill Road in the vicinity of the airport from Aubrey Lane to Clearlake Road. He said because of some runway work the City of Eugene is planning, it will close Greenhill Road and the County’s position is there needs to be some functional replacement east of the airport so there is an opportunity for local circulation without going on Highway 99. He added the federal highway would take care of the relocation, and the County took the position that since it is a County road, they should do the design. He said their proposal is to add it to the CIP, the County would do the design but all the design time, field time and construction work would be reimbursed from the Federal Aviation Administration. He noted it is likely to be a $3 million contract. He said it is his understanding that it needs to go to contract next summer. He said if they add the project to the CIP, they end up with $14 million of work in fiscal 2000.

Snowden said with regard to the Lowell Covered Bridge, $860,000 is money from the Forest Highway Program and $140,000 is to go toward engineering. He noted the Forest Service is the lead agency on the project but the Board authorized them to apply for another $700,000 from STP enhancement money. He added they were successful, so the amount needs to be changed to $1,560,000.

Snowden noted the Board recently approved the intergovernmental agreement that dealt with the Jasper Road fund exchange for Beltline, and the remaining amount to ODOT. He suggested to look at the economic development loan program. He said the Board had intended to add another $2 million when it was formed and in the intervening time, the Board directed to give another $300,000 to Cottage Grove under a grant program and about $560,000 that was paid to the Fairgrounds for right-of-way acquisition. He noted what is left is $1,175,000, but urged the Board to consider whether they want to add it to the loan program or do something else.

Snowden noted they were asking for a decision today but they could come back at another time to actually make a decision on adopting the whole CIP. He said the budget the Board is adopting is for a one year period. He said with the five year program, it gives direction to the staff on how they allocate the time in the coming year.

Susan Daluddung, Planning and Development Director, City of Springfield, stated she had a letter from Mayor Maureen Maine, requesting the allocation of $295,000 to reaffirm Lane County Road Funds for the completion of phase 2 for the Sports Center roads. She noted Lane County had originally committed $700,000 in Road Funds for the development of the roads for the Springfield Sports Center in the early 90's. She said the funds were shifted at that time from other Springfield road related projects. She noted the phase 1 development was coordinated and completed with a parking lot that the city put in, and soccer fields. She said since then, the remaining allocation of Road Funds ($295,000) had been expected to coordinate with the field house construction. She said the Road Funds are essential to completing phase 2 of the road segment because there is no alternate way out of the project, it is one long dead-end that is not practical or feasible. She said they believe it is a prudent use of Lane County Road Funds and it is a top priority for the city. She added the project follows through on the long term efforts, to develop facilities with local non-profits to help provide alternative activities for youth. She said she hopes the Board will be able to fund this.

Dwyer stated that Green had the same concerns as him, making sure that they put more public monies in this project.

Kathy Grand, 190 E. 46th, Eugene, and Roy Grey, 42751 Deerhorn Rd., Springfield, stated the sports facility will be open to anyone, and there will be an identification program for low-income service to youth.

Warren Weathers, Mayor of Lowell, 29 S. Alder, Lowell, stated he was supportive of the grant applications for the Lowell Covered Bridge. He said they are working as a community to find a way where they could assume financial responsibility or contribute to the upkeep of the bridge, once the rehabilitation project is completed. He reported that a traffic safety study was commissioned by them because they wondered if the things they viewed as problems were really not problems. He said they are asking for help from the County and the cost would be less than $25,000 or 45% of their entire tax levy. He said there was a recommendation that the County fix the intersection of Pioneer Street and West Boundary Road. He noted they are both County roads and accidents have occurred at the intersection as a result of poor design of the intersection. He noted another low cost item is a 45 mile per hour curb advisory sign on Jasper Lowell Road, where the speed limit is 35 and he wants to have it taken down. He said for the southbound traffic on Jasper Lowell Road, past the post office, there is a stop ahead and by the time they get to it, they forgot about it and they are still traveling at 45 miles per hour going past the post office and store. He said the engineer suggested that it be moved up so it is within 200 to 300 feet of the stop sign. He added the engineer suggested to provide a transition speed zone entering Lowell on West Boundary Road from the east. He said they are going to put in 1500 feet of sidewalk this spring and since it is a County road, it is fair the County share in the cost of making it safe. He said they are proposing that they will pay 60% of the cost for the sidewalk and the County’s 40% share is about $20,000.

Commissioner Green opened Public Hearing.

Pat Sullivan, 3674 Oxbow Way, Eugene, stated she was Co-Chair, Harlow Neighbors Association and Chair of the Harlow Neighbors’ Subcommittee for the I-105 Soundwall. She thanked the Board, the Roads Advisory Committee and Jack Radabaugh for all of their efforts. She asked the Board to be fair in the funding for their project. She noted at the April 27, County Budget Message and Public Hearing, the neighbors were pleased that Weeldreyer recognized the need for a formal policy for funding the projects as they come up in the future. She asked the Board to adopt a written policy to determine how things will happen for future projects. She asked the Board to treat them the same as the Beltline residents, by funding 25% of their wall. She stated at the budget hearing, there were two grant funds as possible funding sources, but using the monies from the different funds should not be necessary since the full 25% is already programed in the CIP. She added instead of a loan for the portion of the money, they request equal treatment on the measure and asked the Board to fund the full 25% of the project. She said the neighbors did not agree to and cannot afford the 25% split. She said on behalf of her neighbors and herself, she thanked the Board for the 12 1/2% that they had agreed to fund and convert the 12 1/2% repayment to a granted amount.

Jim Baker, 51013 McKenzie Highway, Fin Rock, stated he was representing the River Unity Development Corporation. He said he supported Lane County’s Public Works Department CIP because in it is the Blue River entrance project, to fix the triangle, the main entrance to Blue River. He said they are ready to work to help advance the partnership of Lane County and ODOT. He added they have the support of the McKenzie Watershed Council and they are seeking ways to work with the schools and local nurseries to help with part of the landscaping.

Charles Biggs, 2405 Willakenzie Rd., Eugene, stated that he would like any unallocated funds to be used to upgrade the design of Project 93073, Coburg Road, to improve the northbound bike and pedestrian access via a new entrance on the east side of Coburg Road, and to include a northbound LTD pull out near the new entrance. He noted since the initial design project was created, the County had obtained the rights to Armitage State Park and there are new access issues that could be accomplished with either T-21 funds or park funds in improving access so bikes and pedestrians don’t have to cross two lanes of 55 mile per hour traffic to get into Armitage Park.

Mary Watson, 2855 County Lane, Eugene, stated she was speaking on behalf of the soundwall. She said the County is not risking its money on a deteriorating area, that there had been many improvements to the houses in the neighborhood. She added the noise from I-105 is increasing. She said the project is so valuable that is worth finding the money in order to put in the soundwall.

Mike Farthing, stated he lived in the Harlow neighborhood. He stated he did not support the funding of the soundwall. He believes it is a land use decision because it will have an impact on land use decisions in the area of the soundwall. He said he was aware of the noise from I-105 when he bought his property nine years ago and he paid a price based on the proximity of the freeway. He said that wall would benefit 70 or 80 homes, which calculates to $18,650 per residential unit. He said there is still about $15,000 being spent by the public to benefit these people and properties for a situation they knew about when they moved in. He added there is a significant amount of vegetation that would have to be taken out to construct the soundwall. He said devoting more money toward landscaping, natural vegetation and vegetative screens would be a better way to spend the money than putting the soundwall in. He noted that the soundwall would open up to graffiti and bring added costs to remove it. He urged the Board to delete this funding.

Chuck Imus, 2720 Country Lane, Eugene, stated he was for the soundwall. He added he knew the freeway was there before he moved in, he didn’t realize how bad the noise was until he lived with it for 24 hours per day. He said they wanted to be treated equally as they did with the Beltline. He said he agreed with Weeldreyer that there should be a policy about soundwalls.

Michael Mooser, 32468 Dillard Rd., stated he was glad that Dillard Road was added as a future project and hopes it continues on track. He said with regard to Hidden Meadows, that they move up the project with the speed zone, as the speed of traffic is too fast in the area and wants to see the speed reduced.

Goodson commented that this project did not meet the state speed requirements.

Jack Radabaugh, 1361 Luella, St. stated he is a Co-Chair of the Harlow Neighbors and is on the Roads Advisory Committee. He thanked the County for the $300,000, which made the soundwall possible. He urged the Board to come up with a policy for soundwalls as there could be proposals from other neighborhoods. He suggested that the Commissioners amend the repayment statement in the agreement. He added the $300,000 is already in place and if they were to amend it, it would close the matter. He suggested to use other funds if necessary to find another $150,000, but since the money is already there, amending the repayment clause would take care of the problem.

Harold Mayer, 38446 Wendling Road, Marcola, stated he represents the Marcola School District, the Upper Mohawk Community Council and the Marcola Roads Committee. He noted that Marcola is a small rural community with high poverty, low income and high crime. He said the biggest problem is lack of community pride. He said there is a difficulty in getting services out there as they don’t seem to be a priority. He asked the Board to make Marcola a priority to become a viable community in the County. He said they have an opportunity for that to happen, with sidewalks and curbs through the town of Marcola. He said the people around Marcola do not have the money to pay for the assessments for curbs and sidewalks. He said the feeling of the community is that the sidewalks and curbs are good, but they can’t be paid for. He asked the Board to help them with it. He said he is dealing with the safety of children coming to and from school, crossing a highway to get there. He said they are asking for less than 1/3 of 1% of what is in the road funds ($220,000) or approximately $333 per person. He stated they have a once in a lifetime opportunity to help their community address the safety issues. He added he had applied for several grants in the hope of matching funds for the County, to offset the costs.

Snowden stated the sidewalks are in the final proposal. He said the Roads Advisory Committee agreed that the sidewalks and curbs had merit and have included them in the recommended design concept, but also recognized the policy issue over payment.

Wendy Dixon, 2801 Country Lane, thanked the Board for listening to them as they desperately need sound protection in their neighborhood. She said living by a freeway is very irritating. She said it is a great neighborhood but a $2 million soundwall is out of their reach. She said a soundwall would be a good investment in a good established community. She added a lot of houses are older and were built when the road wasn’t there. She urged the Board to give consideration to providing the extra 12 %, so the neighbors could afford it and continue in their activities as a neighborhood.

There being no one else signed up to speak, Commissioner Green closed the Public Hearing.

Weeldreyer asked why the County’s policy was different for the soundwall than what it was for the Beltline soundwall.

Snowden responded that Beltline Road was constructed by Lane County in the 1960's and early 1970's. He said it was turned over to ODOT in 1979 in exchange for the County receiving River Road. He added when the soundwall issue came up on Beltline the first time, the Board at that time felt there was some obligation of the County to participate because it had at one time been a County road and that is not the case of I-105. He said that I-105 was built by ODOT, and to this day remains an ODOT facility.

Green wanted the Board to focus on what was in front of them today, the draft CIP and noted that a lot of the projects will not get funded or done due to timing and other issues. He noted that he had distributed letters from Springfield , 4J and the Bethel school districts requesting funds.

Snowden stated there were two choices, to add projects to the list, (they could be added with the recognition that unless something changes with the revenue stream, there is more projects to the tail end of the program that will not take place) or add them to the list and delete projects that are currently programed.

Sorenson said to figure out which way they were going, to expand the list of projects for the five year CIP, assume they will be built, and draw down the amount in the Road Fund as has been the practice of the Board to this point. He said he is concerned about the money being used in the road fund.

Snowden noted what is likely to happen will be projects not going to contract. He said the issue of how far down into the cash reserve needs to be addressed. He suggested the Board take the Finance and Audit recommendation and wait until the legislative session is over and see if there is success or failure in Washington, D.C. before they look at the issue again. His suggestion is if the Board is going to add projects, to look at the $1.175 million identified as an Economic Development Grant Program and take the money out of there.

Green asked the Board to cease putting money into the Economic Development Loan Program and a Community Development fund be created for projects in the community and to move away from the loan aspect.

Dwyer agreed with Green. He said the fact of economic development is critical, especially the sidewalks in Marcola.

Weeldreyer agreed with Dwyer to assist unincorporated communities in doing development projects that help their sense of community and provide economic development and public safety considerations. She noted that the proposal to convert the loan program to a community development program she would support, knowing what the future of the road fund is going to be. She suggested an outright grant program for community development projects for match money where some money from the County could be taken and leverage it against other sources of funding.

Morrison shared Weeldreyer’ s concerns. She said she would support a community development fund but to be cautious on how that fund is used. She added considerable thought needs to be given on how the monies are spent and how it is stretched. She said she has reservations about some of the projects. She said it needs to be an equitable program across the board that everyone knows about, that they can access before decisions are made.

Green asked how the road fund was getting replenished.

Snowden responded that now it is roughly equal, state highway fund transfers and timber receipts. He added gas tax monies are not as much as it was a few years ago.

Green stated to propose to assist the school districts (4J and Bethel) with their future plans. He said there are future needs and he wanted the funds identified, recognizing that they are estimated costs.

Weeldreyer said she was supportive of exploring a public policy.

Dwyer stated the Roads Advisory Committee could look at something in the future in determining what the policies should be.

Morrison said if the Road Advisory Committee comes up with policies, that the Board listen to their recommendation.

Green stated he liked Sorenson’s suggestion about having an advisory group composed of different agencies who do not participate in the Roads Advisory Committee. Green asked if the members of the Board who were supportive of the I-5 soundwall would fund the project and have policy discussions later to address future needs.

Dwyer said a policy needs to be developed, but the money had been committed in the CIP.

Green added the Board made an agreement that the people didn’t agree to.

Dwyer noted that the Roads Advisory Committee is a committee. He said he may or may not take their advice. He said he would support the concept of utilizing the money, but there needs to be a broader discussion around the money.

Green said he understands the Board wants a different process than the one he is suggesting. He said he will suggest the same with the soundwall. He said he has a problem when the Board wants to fund a project and then develop a policy later.

Dwyer wanted direction regarding the soundwall. He said the state recognizes its responsibility in regard to noise. He noted the County put in $300,000 to fund its portion, and then a motion was made by a commissioner to loan them 12 1/2% and that was the policy. He said they spent ten years on this. He said the Board needs to develop a policy that treats all future projects around soundwalls on state and federal highways. He said this soundwall is along a federal interstate whose traffic is growing.

Green stated what hadn’t been discussed were alternatives. He said he heard from the people that it is noisy. He said a berm could be used as an alternative. He said there is a berm that is on the south side of the Beltline.

Dwyer stated that the federal government wouldn’t put berms on their interstates. He said it is not a County road. He added neither was the Beltline when they built the soundwall, it was a state highway. He noted this project had been in the works for ten years and in the process of being completed. He said there are plans to have this done within the next fiscal year and it isn’t something that could be put off and that is why he wouldn’t favor putting it off.

Green asked if ODOT was committing money to this.

Goodson replied they had.

Snowden noted that ODOT made a political commitment to fund it, but the reality of finding the money is something they are still working on.

Weeldreyer asked if they approved the money today for the I-105 soundwall, when they would they start to see construction of the wall.

Snowden replied he didn’t know for sure because they are trying to identify the funding source. He said ultimately they will have to make I-105 six lanes and in order to do that, they have to put the soundwall back to the right-of-way line. He added in order to do that, they have to build another wall underneath it and ODOT had been committed to pick up the cost of that wall up with their preservation project. He guessed that they were a number of months away from any kind of intergovernmental agreement with ODOT that would require putting the money into escrow.

Weeldreyer noted as traffic increases and infilling happens, this is not the first nor the last time this Board will be approached for funds from the Road Fund to be able to build soundwalls. She said she believes there needs to be a policy on how they are going to do this and if the policy will be consistent with whether it is a retrofit or part of a new build. She said in order to protect the livability of the community, there will need to be discussions in the future. She said knowing that ODOT doesn’t have its funding in place for this project, she is still 100% in support of the I-105 soundwall. She added there are limitations with soundwalls and the soundwall mostly benefits the properties that are adjacent to it, but the sound still goes up and over. She said the fact the County will put up $300,000 for a soundwall, will not truly address the concerns that are in the neighborhood. She added they are talking about removing mature vegetation which is also a natural barrier. She said while she is in support of keeping an earmark of this money in the CIP for this project, she thinks it would be wise to develop a policy first. She noted the people had waited a long time for this and it had been a commitment on the part of Lane County to be a partner in this and would support the Board honoring that.

Sorenson stated there had been public hearings about the soundwall, people have testified and said the Board should make a decision. He said they should create a community and economic development program and ask the department to come back with a recommendation on what type of structure, board, or committee to help allocate that money. He said with regard to the soundwall, there should be a motion approving a change, 50% ODOT; 25% County; 12.5% City and LID 12.5%. He said by making a decision today to treat the people along the I-105 the same as the other beneficiaries of the soundwall, they are in fact making the policy and treating the people the same.

Green stated they could ask Public Works to come back and give recommendations on what an advisory group and criteria fund would look like and the threshold issues that would need to be dealt with. He asked about the schools, the Marcola sidewalks and Armitage Bike Path.

Snowden noted that the County missed the window on the funding pot for the bike path. He added that is how they got the $700,000 for the Lowell Covered Bridge from the T-21 enhancement project. He said he was talking about some type of an underpass underneath Armitage to get bikes from the east side to the west side and into the park.

Snowden said one way to do it would be to take "X" number of dollars, call it community development and economic development program and create a generic line item. He added they could come back in two months with criteria and a process to present to the Board, and the Board could amend the CIP the following month to add any of the projects they wanted, other than the soundwall.

Morrison stated with regard to the I-105 soundwall, she is adamantly opposed to it. She said she had testified in Salem at the State Highway Commission meeting and at the legislature on different ODOT funding bills in regard to the waste of overall highway monies. She agreed with Michael Farthing regarding how the state is spending its road dollars. She said these homes had been built since 1964 when the I-105 went through. She added that 77% of the homes had either been constructed or purchased after 1980. She said the state has more needs other than a soundwall and the money that it is allocated for this project is a waste of taxpayer dollars. She said she will be voting no.

Dwyer stated he would move to treat the soundwall the same way as they treated Beltline, that they accept the CIP recommendation, having the people treated the same with the 12 %; have the $300,000 as part of the $1.175 million that is embodied in the economic development loan fund for community development and that there be another body appointed by public works determining how the economic development dollars are best spent and not forgetting the rural communities that have problems.

Sorenson stated he will second the part of the motion that they will treat the I-105 soundwall the way they did the other project and to create the community and economic development fund in place of the economic development fund.

Green asked if Dwyer’s motion implied that there would be a policy discussion before allocating these dollars is incorporated in the motion.

Dwyer stated his motion identifies $300,000 in the CIP. He said it converts all but 12 1/2% as a grant and allows 12 1/2% to be a loan, the same as they did with the people on Beltline and it incorporates the fact that they converted the economic development loan fund into the community development loan fund.

Green stated he will be voting against the motion even though he supports the latter portion of converting the economic development loan program to a development fund. He said he didn’t support the first part, going ahead and funding the project and then having a policy on how others may access it.

Sorenson stated the idea of creating a community development fund is a good idea and the Board should pursue it. He said with regard to the I-105 soundwall project, there is a process of having people testify about the Capital Improvement Program. He noted the neighborhood group had done that. He said the group had made a strong case that they should be treated the same and it would be unfair to treat them differently. He noted in the public comment, it was stated that the benefit of the project ($300,000 that Lane County will put into the project) would be given to 20 specific landowners. He said that statement was not accurate because there are beneficiaries to the project besides the people who own immediate adjacent property. He said there had already been a policy and the Board is adhering to it by this decision.

Weeldreyer suggested to just vote on the soundwall and the motion, and because of the second part on the community development fund, she is voting no to the motion on the table.

Dwyer stated he would withdraw his motion concerning the community development fund.

MOTION: to make an allocation of $300,000 for the soundwall and the deletion of the language for payback.


VOTE: 3-2 (Green, Morrison dissenting).

Sorenson noted on page 29 there was an economic development program listed and the motion he will make will change the name of it from Economic Development Program to Community Development Program and will maintain $1.75 million and ask Public Works to come back to the Board to give an overview on how they could entertain suggestions from organizations like Food For Lane County, school districts or others with community development needs for road fund eligible projects.


Morrison asked if it could be community development and economic. She said there is a difference between a loan fund, which it originally was. She added if it had not been a loan fund, there would have been people accessing it.

Sorenson suggested to call it Community and Economic Development Program.

Snowden asked if it was a loan or grant program.

Green said it was a grant program.

Snowden said the Board recognizes that there will still be a $2 million economic development loan program in existence.

Green stated his recommendation would be to cease and desist the economic development loan program. He said the $2 million would go into the Community and Economic Development Program.

Snowden stated it would then be a $3.175 million fund. He also stated there were legal steps that needed to be done.

VOTE: 5-0.

Green asked the Board if the Springfield Sports Complex falls into the same category.

Dwyer noted that this was part of an original agreement they gave to the city. He said in terms of what the overall goals are to helping kids and youth, he said there can’t be a better investment than trying to help kids. He said it would be an appropriate use of the funding sources.

Al Burke, Engineer, City of Springfield, stated they try to track what is happening with their street fund sharing with the County partnership as part of the revenue source for the street fund. He said they had just gone through their CIP Program and had established that they have one more year where they could fund their maintenance projects out of the overlay budget. He noted their operation budget and maintenance over the next two years will create a deficit mode with regard to capital maintenance type activity.

Snowden noted they showed the $2.5 million in the CIP through fiscal 2004 because that is what the Board directed them to do in the Road Fund Fin Plan. He added there are biennial agreements with the cities. He said with regard to the Marcola project, the staff needed to decide how to segment the project and the Roads Advisory recommendation coming to the Board suggests that they take the in-town section of the project from Railroad Boulevard through Wendling and hold it off for another year, so there is an opportunity for the community to come forward with matching money. He noted the project could go next year, but more likely a 2001 project. He noted it is section Milepost 5.81 to 11.49.

Mayer stated that any grant monies that he receives that he applied for, will go back to the County, but he can’t guarantee it and didn’t want a contingency of any matched money.

Weeldreyer stated the reason she disagreed around the issue about schools and also the soundwall discussion, was that it was a commitment the Board was making to a community addressing areas of livability that have been impacted by transportation projects. She said this particular segment of road they are talking about does go through the unincorporated rural community and she hopes the Board would look at this as an investment of the livability and safety in the community, the way they did around the soundwall for the Harlow Road neighbors.

Dwyer stated the Board represents all of the residents throughout the County and there needs to be a policy and a duty to safety.

Weeldreyer stated there was talk at the last Marcola stakeholder’s meeting she went to on Marcola and there is support around the new project. She said Lane County had made progress in terms of designing roads and accommodating communities. She wanted Lane County to continue the same type of commitment to be able to support the community and to provide sidewalks as being a good choice to make. She said she is asking that the $250,000 (Snowden said is the curb and sidewalk portion of the phase of the Marcola Road Improvement Project) be available if the community cannot come up with any other funding source for the sidewalks from the CIP project so that they can be constructed.

Sorenson stated there was already an overall policy that the County did not pay for those.

Green agreed and stated that is what the conflict is.

Sorenson suggested in a special situation the County should go to the fund that was set-up.

Weeldreyer said if they are going to create that fund this year, the timing is fine. She said she wanted to send a message to the Mohawk Valley that the County will be their partner in this and for them to get curbs and sidewalks to improve the livability of their community.

Snowden stated he would come back to the Board in the middle of June for a decision on this project. He said the findings would be mailed on Monday, there is a 30 day review period and at that point they could come back to the Board. He said he would review the changes that were on page 16, where it says: "Coburg Road, north City limits to Game Farm Road," that should be changed to "North City Limits to Armitage Bridge" and the dollar amount would change to $2,850,000. He said they are saying the one project from Game Farm to Armitage Bridge won’t go this year, they will roll the money over and make it one project. He said with regard to page 17, under the "Lowell Bridge" they know they have the $700,000 additional and would suggest the dollar amount on that be changed to $1,560,000 and the footnote will acknowledge that is federal money. He said the last change would be on page 18, under "Payments to other governmental agencies" the intergovernmental agreement says $1,014,000".

Sorenson noted that on page 18, the Economic Development Program would be changed to Community and Economic Development Program.

Snowden suggested to move it to a separate heading, Community Economic Development Program, a fund that would have $3,175,000.

Green noted it was subject to legal counsel’s approval.

MOTION: to approve ORDER 99-5-5-19 with the noted changes.

Dwyer MOVED, Morrison SECONDED.

VOTE: 5-0.

Weeldreyer asked as the County moved ahead with capital construction projects where they are digging up the road, if there was a way for the County to proactively notify the fiberoptic companies that would be looking to make a future investment to develop a strategy to pull fiber later. She added it would be a cost effective way for long range planning, having access to residences and businesses in rural areas.

Snowden responded they could develop a short list of providers and give them copies of the CIP. He added as a Road Fund they couldn’t do it.

There being no further business, Commissioner Green adjourned the meeting at 4:34 p.m.


Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary

go_to.gif (1155 bytes)Back to Board Notices

Contact the webmaster@co.lane.or.us Read the Lane County Liability Disclaimer and User Agreement
Updated: 11/02/05 URL:
Copyright 1997 Lane County Information Services.  All rights reserved.