Category: City Council

GEARs Board Endorses Betty Taylor for City Council

Incumbent councilor Betty Taylor and challenger, Juan Carlos Valle were asked the following questions as proposed by the GEARs Board regarding bicycling. Following each question is Councilor Taylor’s reply. Her opponent Juan Carlos Valle did not respond to the questionnaire.

GEARs: Explain the level of funding for the projects in the Ped/Bike Plan which you support, and where would the funds come from to support these projects?

Taylor: Any transportation funding should include 10% for bike and ped. The money should come from tax levies, SDC’s and any other legal source. We need more off street bike paths.

GEARs: In what way would you promote bicycling for fun, recreation and fitness in our community?

Taylor: Regular closures of streets to cars, if widely advertised would be a good incentive.

City sponsored bike rides and walking tours, with guides (and refreshments at the end), could attract participants and inform citizens of easy and safe ways to get to destinations without automobiles. I remember a city sponsored bike ride which included a safe route to Armitage Park.

Loaner bikes–adult and child sizes–could introduce people who can’t currently afford bikes to the pleasures of cycling.

GEARs: How would you promote mutual respect and safety between the bicycling and non-bicycling citizens of Eugene?

Taylor: If the city treated bike theft as a crime equal to automobile theft, it would encourage respect for bicycle owners. More places to park bikes safely would be another sign of respect. We need signs warning motorists to look for pedestrians and cyclists before turning.
Bicyclists and pedestrians need to be informed about the need to wear light clothing and use lights after dark.

GEARs Letter to Council Regarding Capstone Project

The following letter was sent to City Council today as requested by the GEARs Board at their  March meeting:
The Honorable Mayor Piercy and City Councilors,
GEARs (Greater Eugene Area Riders) Cycling Club welcomes increased housing in Eugene’s downtown core, as proposed in the Capstone Student Housing Development–but we would like to ensure that Capstone’s transportation impact honors the City Council’s adopted Vision, Goals and Outcomes.  For this reason, we recommend the following conditions for approval of Capstone’s MUPTE application:
Require State-of-the-Art Bicycle Parking: For such a high-profile development in a city known nation-wide for its level of bike theft, we’d like to see not only the required number of bicycle racks, but rather a comprehensive bicycle parking system of a quality comparable to the structured auto parking planned.  An example of such bicycle parking is BikeStation, as described athttp://home.bikestation.com/what-is-bikestation
Require Separate Apartment Rent from Parking Space Rent: Provide students an incentive to save money by leaving their cars at home.  This will make the apartments more affordable, reduce the pollution and traffic associated with hundreds of students’ cars, and leave students more money to spend at downtown businesses.  Unused parking spaces might then be available to lease to others who live, work or shop downtown.
Reduce the Number of Parking Spaces: With the University within Capstone’s “20-Minute Neighborhood”, and excellent options for walking, bicycling and transit, there is no need for as much auto parking as Capstone has proposed.  Auto parking should be reduced to the minimum required by Capstone’s lender.
Improve bicycle access from UO: Well-designed bicycle infrastructure will encourage students not only to ride bikes, but to do so safely and legally.  Recent improvements on Alder Street provide an excellent example of the type of infrastructure that can “normalize” bicycle travel.  A similar design on 13th Avenue would serve Capstone residents and their neighbors well.
We encourage you to use this opportunity presented by Capstone to shape downtown Eugene’s transportation future in a way that meets the needs of current and future residents.  If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.


Richard Hughes
President
Greater Eugene Area Riders Cycling Club (GEARs)

http://eugenegears.org/
PO Box 10244
Eugene, OR 97440
541-933-5542

Update on STP-U Funding Issue

An interesting thing happened at Mondays City Council Work Session. Because of a policy recommendation made by the Sustainability Commission that Surface Transportation Program-Urban (STP-U) funds be used for bike/ped projects and not strictly pavement preservation as is currently mandated by council, the council members heard from the community that they would like to revisit this issue. Here is a great wrap-up of that meeting from Howie Bonnett (highlights mine):

Staff (Mark Schoening) had prepared a memo in advance listing three projects for the funds, located on Hilyard, Coburg, and Martin Luther King, which were basically pretty much automobile projects. He also had prepared a memo about how much money had been obtained from various sources for bicycle projects in Eugene in the last 5 years and, due to some big monies recently (stimulus funds for the bridge, etc.,) it averaged 2.5 million per year for bike/ped projects. That seemed to make the Councilors feel that a lot of money was being spent on bicycle/pedestrian projects.

Perhaps somewhat in response to whether the STP-U funds should be spent for alternative transportation modes, Schoening had also listed two bike/ped improvements which could be done in connection with the Martin Luther King and Coburg projects, each costing about 100,000 out of the 2.5 or so million. There followed a discussion of whether these bicycle projects should be bumped to last on the list, or whether they should be done in any case even if the projects required supplemental funds to complete (Schoening offered that gas tax money could be used to make sure the projects were completed). This irritated some councilors, who wanted it clearly stated that the bike/ped work would only be done if it was determined that there was sufficient money for the three road projects, even though Mark Schoening said there would be savings if the bike/ped work was done at the same time as the road repair. A motion to move bikes/ped projects to the bottom of the priority list was made and defeated 5-3 (Poling, Clark, and Solomon losing) and then the main motion passed unanimously which gave the staff authority to add the bike/ped work to the road work on the 3 projects, funded with STP-U funds.

So, net outcome, is that only about 5 % of so of the STP-U funds will go for bike/ped projects, as part of the Coburg and MLK projects. The policy recommendation of the Sustainability Commission was not directly discussed, even though Council has had it for over a month. It is clear that the very large unmet need to do street repair work (now up to 170 million of so), is being used as an argument to suck up all monies for the roads. As I have tried to point out, trying to meet this unmet need as it gets larger and larger, will mean that our ability to build infrastructure to promote alternative mode (active) transportation through diversion of transportation dollars which are discretionary is seriously hampered. Maybe we should have a community discussion about how much money each year it would take to catch up with our unmet road repair needs, and see if we want to undertake that, or whether we should start talking alternatives. Even the 36 million GO Bond measure is a drop in the bucket.

According to Lee Shoemaker, the Cities Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, the projects for the Coburg and MLK projects would be:

Coburg Road Corridor safety improvements for pedestrians and cyclists coordinated with pavement preservation projects that would be funded by STP-U.
And street preservation bond. Could include visual countdown signals, access management where there are willing property owners, and bicycle wayfinding Signage.

Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard Corridor – enhanced pedestrian crossings at east end of corridor coordinated with pavement preservation project that would be funded by STP-U.

Having three council members who voted to move bike/ped projects to the bottom of the last priority is disheartening to say the least and to see the type of projects that should just naturally be part of any complete street talked about being taken off and then highlighted as ‘special bike/ped’ projects sort of rubs salt in the wound. These kind of improvements don’t complete an incomplete network, they simply add what should have been added already.

I also think it is very misleading to have a memorandum that shows $12.5 million in bike/ped projects over the last 5 years when $8.5 million of that was a large bridge project ($5.7 million) and several preservation projects. Take those out and you have about $4 million over 5 years for active transportation projects… $2.5 of that hasn’t been built yet. Which leaves you with $1.5 million new bike/ped infrastructure actually built. How does that compare to non-active transportation projects?

The memo and the Councils reaction to it makes it seem like the City feels it is spending enough on active transportation already. While there has been some great investments and good plans for active transportation we still have an incomplete network that families are afraid to use. We need to be putting large amounts of transportation dollars to completing that network. Bridges are flashy and preservation is essential but we need to be making an investment in the future and that is getting people out of their cars more and active in their transportation choices by having safe and comfortable infrastructure that makes that choice easy.

There are few flexible funds in transportation money. How are we going to complete a network without those funds? We’ll need a plan and we’re working on that with the Bike Master Plan process, but we’ll also need funding! Where is the plan for that funding??

Some calendar items we’ll be looking at for this issue are the MPC public hearing on March 11 and action by the Metropolitan Policy Commission on April 8. Stay tuned for more.

Position on "Idaho Stop" Bill, Change in Meeting Time, & Call to Action!

The GEARs Board met yesterday afternoon and came to agreement that as an organization GEARs supports HB2690, otherwise known as the “Idaho Stop Bill” that would allow cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs.

The April 13th GEARs Meeting has also been rescheduled to allow Board and general members to make public comments about the cities position at the April 13 City Council Meeting. The new meeting will be held on April 27th at 7:00 pm at the Keystone.

Background:
A letter was written (download PDF) by the city’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator on behalf of the Inter-Governmental Relations Committee (IGR) without consulting the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) or the bike community at large. In that letter the City stated it’s position as opposing the bill. Because of the reaction from the bike community to that letter the IGR (made up of three city council members) re-evaluated their position and two members changed from “Oppose” to “Neutral”. Because it was no longer unanimous it automatically goes to the full City Council for a vote to support, oppose, or be neutral on the bill. And that is where GEARs members come in.

A CALL TO ACTION:
GEARs members are encouraged to attend the City Council Meeting and share your opinion on the Bill and/or the city’s process in developing their position. They are reconsidering the City’s position and will likely be voting that night. Time for public comment is at the beginning of the meeting- Monday, April 13th at 7:30 p.m. Get there early to sign in. There will also be a lot of skateboarders there to support the new Washington/Jefferson Park so it will be a great show of Active Transportation modes- we’ll be taking over and letting the Council know that we want to see change in priorities to more healthy, safe, and sustainable transportation options and we want the City to communicate with us!

The BPAC will also be discussing this issue and taking a position at their meeting this evening- 5:30 p.m., Atrium Building, Sloat Room.

And finally, there was a Guest Viewpoint in todays Register Guard from our Vice-President, Jay Klein.