FY 2006-11 Eugene CIP - Laserfiche WebLink

New Search

Following the recommendation of the CIP by the Budget Committee, the projects in FY06 - became the basis for preparation of the FY06 Capital Budget. The Capital Budget is submitted to the Budget Committee in the spring of each year and adopted by the City Council in June. Projects in the second fiscal year of the CIP become the basis of the subsequent fiscal year's Capital Budget. At the time the Budget is adopted, any changes to project timing or funding adopted in the Capital Budget process or by supplemental budget action are automatically ~ considered to be amendments to the CIP. Commission/Committee Recommendations and Public Input . During the summer and early fall of even-numbered years, staff compiles the Draft CIP using input and requests from a variety of sources including neighborhood groups, individual citizens, l adopted plans and policy documents, staff needs assessments, and Council direction. On December 13, 2004, the Planning Commission held a work session on the Draft CIP. Staff - \ responded to questions from commissioners regarding projects at the Airport, the proposed ~ Patterson Street Underpass, the location of the proposed replacement of City Hall and the status of a variety of transportation projects. Commissioners were also interested in the on-going discussion regarding the acquisition of land to develop a community park in the Santa Clara area. On December 14, 2004, three members of the public spoke at a public hearing held by the Planning Commission. In addition, three pieces of written testimony were received by the Planning Commission and were included in materials distributed to Council for the March 7, 2005 meeting. On January 10, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend that the council adopt the Draft CIP with the following amendments. • Move projects including traffic-calming, residential street lighting, residential street trees, access ramps and mixed-use pedestrian amenities from the unfunded category to the funded category of the transportation section. (The Planning Commission did not r' identify a funding source.) • Reinstitute the neighborhood needs analysis process in the next CIP process. The Planning Commission also asked that the council pay close attention to the long held goals of the City while reviewing the CIP and to acknowledge that not all of the projects in the Draft CIP were completely through the deliberation process. On February 7 and February 22, the Budget Committee reviewed the draft CIP. While the com- mittee did not conduct a formal public hearing, at those meetings two individuals provided testimony indicating projects they supported and those they did not support. They also expressed concern regarding funding for capital projects ahead of other City needs. City of Eugene 2006 - 2011 Capital Improvement Program i~ 11