|
<br />~
<br />
<br />jaG
<br />
<br />5/10/71
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />some counts should be made. Traffic Engineer said a study could be made of the immediate
<br />area.
<br />
<br /> I
<br /> ,
<br /> II
<br /> 'I
<br /> Ii
<br /> I'
<br /> II
<br /> II
<br /> I,
<br /> II
<br /> Ii
<br /> 11
<br /> '!
<br /> I,
<br /> Ii
<br /> :1
<br /> "
<br /> 'I
<br /> I:
<br /> d
<br /> I'
<br /> Ii
<br /> Ii
<br /> !I
<br /> I:
<br /> d
<br /> Ii
<br /> :i
<br /> I'
<br /> ,
<br /> Ii
<br /> II
<br /> I'
<br /> q
<br /> I .
<br /> I'
<br /> II
<br /> ,I
<br /> II
<br /> ,I
<br /> "
<br /> "
<br /> i:
<br /> II
<br /> 'I
<br /> I'
<br /> ,I
<br /> I
<br /> Ii
<br /> Ij
<br />I,
<br /> d
<br /> II
<br />Ii
<br />I'
<br /> ,I
<br />I'
<br /> ,
<br />II
<br />q
<br />I:
<br />I!
<br />"
<br />I,
<br />'I
<br />II
<br />Ii
<br />I'
<br />,I
<br />II
<br />"
<br />.I
<br />I'
<br />d
<br />II
<br />'I
<br />I.
<br />"
<br />!f
<br />II
<br />~ I
<br />Ii
<br />,:
<br />Ii
<br />),1
<br />Ii
<br />Ii
<br />"
<br />I'
<br />II
<br />I:
<br />'I
<br />!,
<br />"
<br />I:
<br />I'
<br />,:
<br />Ii
<br />II
<br />11
<br />I
<br />"
<br />q
<br />I'
<br />I'
<br />Ii
<br />,I
<br />II
<br />. !
<br />!I
<br />II
<br />Ii
<br />Ii
<br />II
<br />11
<br />I:
<br />~
<br />1\
<br />:i
<br />II
<br />~
<br />
<br />Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that approval be withheld on this matter until
<br />the next Council meeting and that the Traffic Engineer be instructed to make a count on
<br />Bailey Lane traffic prior to that time to give the Council information on the traffic
<br />flow. Motion carried.
<br />
<br />B. *Parking Removal Plan for Central Business Distr>ict Circumferential Streets
<br />Council previously approved removal of parking from core area segments of Oak, 8th,
<br />Charnelton and 10th, coincidentally with creation of four additional off-street lots.
<br />Property owners and tenants in the area were contacted for review of the plan. 41%
<br />responded of which 25% were tenants. The Downtown Association has contacted those
<br />who responded negatively. In spite of the fact iliat the decision was not unanimous,
<br />the Downtown Association has requested that the City move ahead. The majority of owners
<br />recognize that the streets will be widened next summer, with ultimate parking removal.
<br />Concern was also expressed that the lots be available before removal of parking sites.
<br />
<br />Councilwoman Beal was concerned that parking lots were not permanently landscaped.
<br />She was assured that landscaping was planned for permanent lots, but that these
<br />proposed four were Renewal Agency property and were interim lots. Potted trees
<br />were, however, planned for them. She was also assured that a tree-planting program
<br />was included in plans for street widening.
<br />
<br />City Manager explained that the renewal plan calls for three additional large parking
<br />facilities, and that landscaping is included in the plans.
<br />
<br />Mr. W~lliams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that parking removalfrom the core area, as
<br />delineated by staff, be approved.
<br />
<br />Mr. W. Ellingsworth, 2760 Willamette, spoke for the Downtown Association, which has requested
<br />that metered parking be removed from fuese str>eets as soon as off-street parking can be provided.
<br />
<br />Councilmen were a little concerned with removal of short-time parking meters. They felt citizens
<br />should have an opportunity to run short errands. It was pointed out that most of the off-street
<br />lots would be metered.
<br />
<br />Mr. Vince Farina, member of the Downtown Business Association, said merchants in the Association
<br />have worked diligently for about twenty years to move traffic in and around the downtown area,
<br />and to provide adequate off-street parking. The streets will have to be used for movement of
<br />pedestrians and traffic, not for storage of autos.
<br />
<br />Mr. George Boehnke, 3120 Agate, said most merchants on 8th would not agree to removal of parking
<br />unless adequate off-street parking is provided. Mr. Charles Bonnett, 193 West 19th, reminded
<br />Councilmen that they should consider the long-run effect of this plan, and that ninety new
<br />spaces would be added through the off-street lots.
<br />
<br />Vote taken on motion as stated. Motion carried.
<br />
<br />C. Bid, PublIC ~orks Department
<br />PAVING & SANITARY SEWER RECONSTRUCTION
<br />Alley btn 10th & 11th Avenues from
<br />Lawrent to Washington (Salvation Army)
<br />Devereaux & Pratt
<br />Shur-Way Contractors
<br />Kenneth R. Bostick
<br />Fred Stubbert
<br />Wildish Const. Co.
<br />
<br />14' pvg $6.53/fr.ft. San Swr -
<br />$4,035;60. Budgeted $4,770.00
<br />
<br />$7,878.70
<br />8,860.54
<br />9,134.21
<br />9,036.01
<br />9,590.18
<br />
<br />COMPLETION DATE: August 1, 1971
<br />
<br />Two weeks ago a decision was delayed on award of this bid to give the Council an opportunity to
<br />view the site. The site was toured before the committee meeting.
<br />
<br />Manager read letters. from Bernard Strassmaier, 1034 Lawrence Street, Alexander Dederer, Cedar
<br />Lane Company and Warren L. Ramsay, 452 West 10th, in opposition to paving of the alley. It
<br />was determined by staff that 50% of the alley frontage was in favor of the paving, even if all
<br />three letters were valid. Staff opinion is that~ since the property owned by commercial users
<br />will receive heavier than residential use, the alley should be paved~ and that it will benefit
<br />all the properties.
<br />
<br />John Horn, 1170 Pearl~ said Cedar Lane still owns frontage on the alley, but that it is under
<br />option to the Salvation Army.
<br />
<br />Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that the bid be awarded to the low bidder for the
<br />project. Rollcall vote. All councilmen present voting aye, the motion carried.
<br />
<br />D. Planning Commission Report (April 6, 1971 - Held from meeting of April 26, 1971)
<br />Zone Change recommended denial - K. Ray Barnes; southwest corner Beltline Road and
<br />Norkenzie. R-l to R-2 PD
<br />
<br />Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Gribskov that the Planning Commission recommendation be
<br />upheld.
<br />
<br />*Sections printed in italics are from comnrrttee nnnutes.
<br />
<br />5/10/71 - 2
<br />
<br /> r I
<br /> I
<br /> I
<br /> 11
<br /> I'
<br /> 'I
<br /> II
<br /> il
<br /> I,
<br /> Ii
<br /> !I
<br /> jt
<br /> '!
<br /> II
<br /> Ii
<br /> :1
<br /> I,
<br /> :1
<br /> "
<br /> [I e
<br /> II
<br /> Ii
<br /> !f
<br /> "
<br /> "
<br /> :1
<br /> \1
<br /> :1
<br /> 'I
<br /> I' I
<br /> ,I
<br /> I'
<br /> I
<br /> ,
<br /> ,
<br /> !
<br /> II
<br /> I
<br /> ~
<br /> I,
<br /> II
<br /> II
<br /> it
<br /> "
<br /> II
<br /> I:
<br /> !I
<br /> "
<br /> :i
<br /> "
<br /> Ii
<br /> :'
<br />il
<br /> 'I
<br /> II
<br /> [I
<br />11
<br />I'
<br />I I
<br />!
<br />,
<br />,
<br />!i
<br />. I
<br />I
<br />I,
<br />I,
<br />!l
<br />II
<br />II
<br />I; e
<br />II
<br />,I
<br />II
<br />II
<br />Ii
<br />it
<br />"
<br />"
<br />ij
<br />
<br />II
<br />
<br />e
<br />
|