11/15/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 Ms. Andersen explained that the State was initiating its Capital .Improve- ment Program Update would be adopting its Six-Year Plan in July 1986, the e process for that adoption beginning in January 1985. She explained that the City of Eugene must have an election on Phases II and III of the widening project, which falls under the Historic Tree Ordinance, in order to be competitive in securing funds for those phases. She said staff was recommending an election be held that would incorporate the widening phases as well as the 6th/7th Avenues Extension Project. Referring to a timeline which will allow for such a process, Ms. Andersen explained that the State was preparing an environmental impact statement for the extension project, to be available for public review in early 1986, with a possible alignment determination by June 1985. She commented that if the City does not have a project listed for construction funding in the draft Six-Year Plan which is presented to the State Transportation Commission, it will be difficult to get a project added prior to adoption of the plan in July 1986. Ms. Andersen then reviewed the proposed timeline for the design and funding of Phases II and III of the 6th/7th Avenues Widening Project and the EIS review for the 6th/7th Avenues Extension Project, the former to begin in December, 1984, and ending in September, 1985, and the latter to begin in early 1985. She explained that the timeline would allow the City to meet deadlines for elections and for incorporation of the project in the State's Six-Year Plan Update. In response to a question by Councilor Ehrman regarding the language of the Historic Tree Ordinance, Ms. Andersen said it was unclear how much preliminary work was required but that any election on the subsequent project phases would have to clearly identify where any impact on historic trees would occur. City - Attorney Tim Sercombe explained that the charter amendment required publication of the proposed widening and designation of those trees to be affected for four consecutive weeks prior to the election, thus requiring specific informa- tion to be developed before any election could be held. In response to a question by Councior Wooten regarding the bids on the project, Mr. Sercombe said the State could keep the bids open with the concurrence of the bidders and delay the award; however, there has been some difficulty with the low bidder and the State was inclined to reject all bids and rebid the project. Responding to a related question, Ms. Andersen said the project plan incor- porated a weave or shifting of the center line three or four feet. She said the plan also included special conditions and requirements for handling trees in the constuction area. She said she was not sure how any more specific conditions for tree maintenance could be incorporated into the plan. She added that it would be possible for the City arborist to review the bid specifications before being submitted for bid. Mr. Gleason said the City could assume greater responsibility for post-project maintenance to mitigate any project shock on the trees. In response to a question by Councilor Obie regarding any financial impact of the two election dates, Ms. Andersen said that staff did not have any projected cost to the City since the project was State-funded. Mr. Gleason explained that a special election would cost approximately $15,000 to $17,000 while the cost of the March election would be shared with Lane Community College and the Eugene school districts. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 15, 1984 Page 2