|
<br />e
<br />
<br />- ------ ------- - ~-
<br />_. ---_.- ._--~~-
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />'e
<br />
<br />I
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />-fir --
<br />
<br /> ,
<br /> I
<br /> 'I
<br /> I
<br /> I'
<br /> )!
<br /> ji
<br /> Ii
<br /> II
<br /> II
<br /> ,I
<br /> Ii
<br /> 11
<br /> II
<br /> II
<br /> II
<br /> I!
<br /> II
<br /> f
<br /> I
<br /> 11
<br /> I!
<br /> l'
<br /> II
<br /> ,I
<br /> II
<br /> I'
<br /> :!
<br /> I,
<br /> I!
<br /> I'
<br /> Ii
<br />r
<br />II
<br />'I
<br />II
<br />1:.1
<br /> I',
<br />"
<br /> Ii
<br /> Ii
<br /> ,:
<br /> I;
<br /> 11
<br /> I ~
<br /> jI
<br /> "
<br /> I
<br /> I
<br /> I
<br /> l~
<br />2 ,
<br /> ,
<br /> !
<br />Ij
<br />!
<br />'il
<br /> !
<br /> ~
<br /> ;
<br /> .I
<br /> I
<br /> I
<br /> f!
<br /> II
<br /> I;
<br /> 11
<br /> II
<br /> I,
<br /> I.
<br /> I
<br /> I
<br /> !
<br /> J
<br /> I'
<br /> ,I
<br /> I,
<br /> I.
<br /> "
<br /> 1:
<br />
<br />421 ~
<br />
<br />1/26/59
<br />
<br />---- - ----.
<br />. --- --
<br />
<br />- .----- "-- -----
<br />... - ~ .-
<br />
<br />IT WAS LIKEWISE RECOMMENDED IN COMPliANCE WITH A REQUEST FROM THE COUNTY COMMI.SSIONERS
<br />THAT THE EAST/WEST ALLEY fROM EAST PARK STREET TO PEARL STREET AND BETWEEN 7TH AND
<br />8TH AVENUES BE DESIGNATED AS ONE-WAY EASTBOUND ALLEY, AND THAT 8TH AVENUE BE MADE TWO-
<br />WAY fROM EAST PARK STREET TO PEARL STREET.
<br />
<br />MAPS WERE PRESENTED SHOWING THE PROPOSED TRAffiC CHANGES, AND AfTER SOME DISCUSSION
<br />IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THE' ITEM BE HELD OVER UNTIL THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING.
<br />
<br />IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. MCGAffEY THAT 'TEM I OF'THE REPORT Of THE PUBLIC
<br />SAfETY COMMITTEE BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED WITH MR. LINDEEN VOTING NAY.
<br />
<br />2. REPORT ON fEASIBILITY'Of REMOVING ONE-WAy'GRID SYSTEM ON ALL NORTH/SOUTH STREETS
<br />BETWEEN 5TH AND 6TH AVENUES - A REPORT WAS PRESENTED FROM THE TRAffiC ENGINEER
<br />CONCERNING THE ONE-WAY GRID SYSTEM AS IT EXTENDS BETWEEN 5TH AND 6TH AVENUES
<br />FROM CHARNEL TON .TO OAK STREET.. THE TRAff"lC ENGINEER .INDICATED THAT HE HAD MADE
<br />A STUDY AND fOUND THAT I f THE ONE-WAY_' .GRI 0 WERE REMOVED AND. A. TWO-WAY. S.YSTEM
<br />INSTALLED, 13 ADDITIONAL PEDESTRIAN-VEHICLE CONfLICTS WOULD BE CREATED. HE INDI-
<br />CATED THAT THE ONE-WAY STREET SYSTEM REDUCES ACCIDENT HAZARD AND DELAYS DUE TO
<br />PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENTS AND'VEHICLE'MOVEMENT T~ROUGH PEDE~TRIAN LANES. HE fURTHE~
<br />INDICATED THAT TWO SIDES' OF A ONE-WAY GRID SYSTEM ARE fREE Of TRAfFIC fOR PEDES-
<br />TRIAN MOVEMENT CROSSING ON LIGHTS~ THE TRAfflC ,ENGINEER FURTHER INDICATED THAT
<br />A ONE-WAY STREET CAN HANDLE MORE TRAffiC MORE'READILY AND WITH MORE. CONVENIENCE
<br />AND LESS CONfUSION TO THE DRIVERS THAN A TWO-WAY STREET. TURNiNG MOVEMENTS Of
<br />HEAVY VEHICLES ARE IMPLEMENTED AND THE PASSING Of STOPPED OR SLOW MOVING VEHI-
<br />CLES ON THE STREETS- IS fACILyrATED WHERE THE-ONE-WAY SYSTEM ISIN OPERATION. .
<br />THE REPORT fURTHER STATED THAT SINCE THE ONE-WAY GRID SYSTEM HAS, BEEN IN OP-ERA-
<br />TION fOR APPROXIMATELY ELEVEN YEARS, IT WOULD BECOME CONFUSING AND HAZARDOUS
<br />TO MO.TOR I STS. WHO HAVE BECOME ACCUST.OMED TO THE S.YSTEMI f TWO-WAY OPERAT.ION WERE
<br />RE INSTALLED. . fOR THESE'REASONS AND OTHERS WH I.CH WE.RE.ADVAN.CeD. I.N QUESTI.ON; AND
<br />ANSWER SERIES, THE TRAffiC ENGINEER RECOMMENDED THAT. THE ONE-WAY SYSTEM BE CON-
<br />TINUED AS PRESENTLY fOUND, WHICH RECOMMENDATION WAS CONCURRED IN BY THE COMMITTEE.
<br />
<br />J .
<br />
<br />IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. CHATT THAT ITEM 2 OF THE REPORT. Of THE PUBLIC
<br />SAfETY COMMITTEE BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED. . -
<br />
<br />3. CONSIDERATION' Of EXTENSION. Of 19TH AVENUE fROM TYLER STREET TO CHAMBERS STREET
<br />THROUGH PARK-A IRE SUBDIVISION - A SHORT GENERAL DISCUSSION WAS HELD ON THIS.
<br />MATTER AND IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS ITEM BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COM-
<br />MISSI.ON FOR STUOY ANO'RECOMMENOAlION. . . -, ;;
<br />
<br />I T WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. MCGAFFEY THAT I.TEM' 3 OF THE ~EPO'R.T OF. THE.
<br />PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE' BE APPROVE'O. "MOTION"CARRIED.'
<br />
<br />fiNANCE COMMITTEE
<br />I. CONSIDERATION OF SETTING UP. PROPERTY ACQU1SITlON 'FUND -AfTER A VERY SHORT- AND
<br />SOMEWHAT GENERAL DISCUSSION, IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT THIS ITEM BE HE(DOVER."
<br />
<br />IT WAS MOVED BY MR. SHEARER SECONDED BY MR. MCGAFFEY THAT ITEM I OF THE REPORT OF- THE
<br />fiNANCE COMMITTEE BE APPROVED. MOTION CARRIED.' "
<br />
<br />A REPORT Of THE COMMITTEE MEETI'NG HELD JANUARY 23,1959'WAS .SUBMIT.TEDAND READ AS..fOLLOWS:
<br />
<br />"PRESENT: MAYOR CONE; COUNCILMEN SHEARER"~' lAURIS'" MOLHOL'M., MCGAFF-EY,. CHAT.T, MOYER.
<br />AND WILSON; CITY MANAGER; CITY RECORDER; CITY AnORNE,Y; DIRECTOR Of
<br />PUBLIC WORKS; ACTING CHIEF Of POLICE; TRAFFIC ENGINEER; ADMINISTRATIVE
<br />Ass'l STANT; BYRON PR I'CE, SUPER INTENDENT-SECRETARY, EUGENE WATER & ELECTR I C
<br />BOARD; fRED BRENNE; DAN WYANT, EUGENE -REGISTER-GUARD; JACK CRA-IG, KERG.
<br />
<br />CCM-41 TTEE or THE WHOLE
<br />I. REQUEST FROM EUGENE WATER' &. EL:ECTRIC' BOARD 'CONCERN I NG CHARTE-R CHANGE :TO AUTHOR.' ZE
<br />CARMEN-StHTH PROJECT - MR. BYRON ,PRICE, SueERI-NTENDE-NT-SECRETARY OF EUGENE WATER
<br />& ELECTRIC BOARD, DISTR-IBUTEDCOPI'ES Of THE RESOLUTION.JPASSE-D BY EWEB SET,TI.NG
<br />fORTH THE PROPOSED 'CHARTER CHANGE fOR iHE CARMEN-SM ITH..HYDROELE.CTR I C PROJECT,.
<br />MR. PRICE INDICATED THAT THE PROPOSED BONDS WOULD BE PAID FOR OUT OF THE EARNINGS
<br />Of EWEB AND WOULD BE 'STRICTlY REVENUE BONDS.
<br />
<br />I _0.
<br />
<br />I,
<br />
<br />THE PROPOSED COST ESTIMATES R~~GE ~ETWEEN 1$17,000,000 AND $24;000,000 AND THERE
<br />IS NO SPECIFIC COST IN THE AMENDMENT. THE APPLICATION fiLED BEfORE THE fEDERAL
<br />POWER COMMISSI'ON INDICATES AN ESTIMATED COST' fOR THIS PROJECT OF- $19,318,030.
<br />
<br />If THE PROJECT IS BUILT AT THE APPROXIMATE COST Of $20,000,000 AND THE AVERAGE
<br />WATER YEARS 'ARE MAINTAINED, THE :PROJECT WILL ENHANCE THE ABILlT'I'_Qf EWEB TQ."
<br />MA I NTA IN' I'TS LOW 'RATE.' . TH I-S, HOWEVER, PRESUPPOSES THAT .THE PRESENT; I NfLAT 10NARY
<br />TREND AND UNKNOWN OUTSIDE fACTORS DO 'NOT-'REQUIRE AN INCREASE IN RATES fOR REA-
<br />SONS OTHER THAN THE COST Of THE' CARMEN-SM I TH'PROJECT. -MR. PR I CE '1 N H 1,$ PRESENTA-
<br />TION 'INDICATED THAT THIS IS ONE Of THE fEW LOCATIONS LEFT WHICH CAN BE BUILT AS
<br />ECONOMICALLY AS IT WILL BE BUILT AND THAT EWEB HAD AGREEMENTS .WIT.H THE- fiSH AND
<br />WILDLIFE SERVICE AND THE OREGON STATE fISH COMMISSION WHICH RULED OUT THE MAJOR
<br />PORTION Of THE OBJECTIONS WHICH WERE ADVANCED TOWARD HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS 'ON
<br />THE McKENZIE IN PREVIOUS TIMES.
<br />
<br />i
<br />I
<br />,
<br />i
<br />I
<br />!
<br />I
<br />\\
<br />~
<br />
|