|
<br />.
<br />
<br />Council Chamber
<br />Eugene, Oregon
<br />April 30, 1973
<br />
<br />Adjourned meeting of the Common Council of the city of Eugene, Oregon -
<br />adjourned from the m'eeting held April 23, 1973~ was called to order by
<br />His Honor, Mayor Lester E. Anderson at 7:30 p.m. on April 30, 1973 in the
<br />Council Chamber with th~ following councilmen pr~sent: Mrs~ Beal,
<br />Mr. Williams, Mr. Hershner, Mrs. Campbell, Messrs. Keller, Murray, McDonald,
<br />and Wood.
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />I. Public Hearings ,
<br />A. 'First Avenue Ramps, Washington/Jefferson' Bridge Extension
<br />Manager introduced Robert Royer, Bill Cranford, Hal Versteeg, and
<br />Adrian Olson from the State Highway Division. Mr. Royer summarized
<br />the report from the State on alternatives, to removing the ramps to
<br />and from 1st Avenue upon opening of the Washington/Jefferson extension
<br />of 1-105 ,(copies previously distributed to Council members). He
<br />referred to the Eugene/Springfield Area Transportation Study (ESATS)
<br />resulting in development of ia plan published in 1967 designating a
<br />series of streets to handle future transportation needs. The 1-105
<br />segment under discussion is based upon that transportatiop system.
<br />Mr. Royer said the proposed Roosevelt Freeway (Highway 126) going
<br />west from the extension could not exist if the ramps are left in,
<br />:and review.ed other segments of the system provtding connectLons to
<br />the project. He noted the agreement between the State and the City
<br />that'there would be no access points on the freeway between the
<br />River and 6th and 7th Avenues.' He also noted the rec'ent City Charter
<br />amen~ent which probably would require voter approval before any
<br />agreement is entered into between the Highway Division and the City
<br />to retain the ramps, and :environmental impact statement requirement.
<br />Mr. Royer said the alternates set forth in tl).e Highway Division report
<br />would require updating of the ESATS plan;'.beforeFeaeral approval, , '
<br />and Federal approval would be required since this project falls
<br />wi thin:,;the Federal, highway system with design based on 20-year
<br />projeptions. Any change at this time would be difficult to accomplish.
<br />
<br />Mr. ~oyer detailed the alternates to closing the ramps as contained
<br />in the Highway Division Repo'rt. The ramps are scheduled"to be closed
<br />about mid-June upon opening of the 1-105 entension. Retaining the
<br />ramps,' changing the design at this time"he 'said, might result in
<br />curtailing of funds for the' proj ect from the" Federal government and
<br />place the Highway DILvision under severe financial handicap. He went
<br />on to describe safety hazards for northbound traffic entering the
<br />, freeway from the, ramps - sight distance, merging, stopping distance,
<br />congestion, etc, He said the structure could be widened at an
<br />approxi~ate cost of $350,00 to handle the situation for a short period
<br />of time (Alternate: 2 H)'but 'it could not be considered as a permanent
<br />installation. It would seem tooexpensive\ for a short-term improve-
<br />ment and is unacceptable from traffic safety standpoint. Mr. Royer
<br />added that the ramps were installed to accommodate traffic across
<br />the Washington/Jefferson br~dge upon its opening and during construction
<br />of the 1-105 extension and were not intended as a permanent installa-
<br />tion.' Slides were, shown depicting traffic patterns, alternatives with
<br />retention of the ramps, proposed connection of Highway 126, and pro-
<br />Jections o'f traffic loads in the general area. He repeated concerns
<br />of the Highway Division that change in the proposed design, retaining
<br />the ramps, would not be in conformance with the existing agreement
<br />between the State and the City and any new agreement now would require
<br />voter approval. Overall safety in traffic movement::would also b,e of
<br />'concern and Federal funding of transportation projects could be
<br />jieopardized since ,prior approval must be received from Department
<br />of the Secretary of Transportatinn of any new design.
<br />
<br />Public hearing,was opened with the following people speaking against
<br />clb'sing of the ramps. 'Theywere Susan.'Franklin;; 890 W~st 3rd Avenue;
<br />Wenzl Evans, 1031 Leigh Street; Bryan Livingston, 577 Madison Street;
<br />Owen Hodge, 108 Cross Place; Karen Johnson, 357 Polk Street; Ivan
<br />Blood, 370 West 1st Avenue; Margaret Rosseau, 63,2 West 4th Avenue; ,
<br />Ed St. Clair, 652 West Broadway; Vincent Myers, 763 Nantuc~et Street;
<br />Howard Warner, 4925 Barger Drive; Dan Herbert, 4450 Hilyard Street;
<br />Dave Brynerson, 880 Par~ Terrace). Ralph Ald~ve, 4150 Pearl Street;
<br />Laurence'Perkins, 1925 Dogwood Drive, for School District4J; .
<br />Steve Hewitt, 2560 Hilyard' Street; Allen Whittington, 585 Oakway Road;
<br />Fred Manela, 88 North Madison; Bryan Somonithh, 208 East 2nd Avenue;
<br />Mary Brisco, president of the League of Women Vo:ters.
<br />'1\ 4/30/73 t; 1
<br />
<br />~ I
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />:.
<br />
|