Laserfiche WebLink
<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 />