CCAgenda-3/08/04Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment B Proposed City Council Action Items As stated in Attachment A, the Fairmount East Campus Committee (Committee) thinks that it is critical that the Ag. ate Street and Area-Wide Traffic Calming studies be funded now in order to: · gmn a comprehensive and explicit understanding of the traffic problems; · determine the necessary implementation measures essential to mitigate the impacts on the neighborhood as a result of increased UO development in the East Campus Area; · proactively address the UO's incremental development approach; and · figure out how mitigation measures will be funded after the studies are completed. Therefore, at this time, the Committee proposes that the City Conner take action to fund the Agate Street and Area-Wide Traffic Calming studies. The Committee would like to present an innovative approach to address the funding issue related to implementing the mitigation measures identified in the studies. After the studies are completed and we have a better idea of the needed improvements required to address traffic impacts on the neighborhood, the Committee urges City Council and City Staff to seriously encourage a City Council initiated Local Improvement District (LID) to be approved in order to fund the identified improvements. The general sentiment of the homeowners between Agate and Falrmount Boulevard is that we are ready to help fund.the traffic solutions in our neighborhood as long as the UO and City are willin~ to step forward .ano ta?e meir part in the financing. This goes without saying that the neighborhood is willing to be a part of .me solution if the traffic problems are not the direct result of specific development proposals. If, for instance, specific UO development activities directly result in traffic impacts and the degradation of the transportation system in our neighborhood, the UO is responsible for funding the improvements needed to mitigate those impacts. The reason why the Committee thinks that it is critical that the City Council initiate the LID is because the UO East Campus Area will be included within the LID, which results in the UO having voting dominance if the property owners initiate the LID. In this case, the UO's vote alone could prevent the approval of the LID. .Consequently, the Committee urges City Council and City Staff to seriously encourage a LID to be approved m order to fund the identified improvements and give the neighbors the assurance that traffic impacts will be successfully mitigated. The Committee believes that the total cost across the neighborhood to implement comprehensive traffic calming solutions and fix Agate Street will cost less than the typical application of a LID, which entails bringing a substandard street up to current street standards. The Committee also believes that the distribution of this total cost will not significantly impact the individual homeowners. In addition, the Committee understands that in order to formally recognize planning and implementation projects that these projects need to be identified in Capital Improvement Plans or other plans like TransPlan. Therefore, after the studies are completed, the Committee urges City Council and City Staff to incorporate the implementation projects identified in the studies into the necessary City plans, In conclusion, the Committee expects that if the City Council approves the UO's East Campus application that the City Council will fund the needed traffic studies and give us the assuran~ that the traffic impacts due to the UO's East Campus development will be revisited and addressed once the studies are completed as suggested above. The Committee proposed City Council action items: 1. Approve the Planning Commission's recommended policies~. 2. Fund the Agate Street and Area-Wide Traffic Calming studies. 3, Make a formal commi~anent now to review the outcome of the studies and problem solve th associated implementation and funding solutions after the studies are completed. ~ As noted in the cover letter, the Committee would like City Council to verify that the policy regarding CUP's in the R-1 buffer area clearly addresses U~e lot sizes allowed in a CUP application so it is corn~rible with the single family residential character. Fairmount East Campus Committee March 1, 2004 Application File # MA 05-7, RA 03-5, CA 03-5 Altachment B City Cottn¢il A§enda Pa0e 256