|
<br />.
<br />
<br />Manager reported that agreement on price was reached with the Mathers on purchase
<br />of their property. However, legal assurances requested by the Council have not
<br />be received. No action was recommended until these assurances are available.
<br />In answer to Mrs. Campbell, Manager said the property has not been purchased
<br />and will not be until Council has an opportunity to consider legal issues.
<br />
<br />J ,
<br />L. I Public Works Improvement projects - Council was previously furnished wi th copies of
<br />'memo from Public Works Department listing arterial improvements for Council initia-
<br />tion to allow bidding and public hearing on the projects. Streets included were:
<br />
<br />A. Norkenzie, Cal Young to Belt Line - 44' paving w/sidewalks
<br />B. Oakway Road, Oakmont to Cal Young - 44' paving
<br />C. West Amazon Drive, Snell to Martin - 36' paving
<br />,D. Martin, West Amazon Drive to Center Way - 36' paving
<br />:E. Polk, Railroad Boulevard to north of Polk Court - 36' paving
<br />
<br />, Nanager explained funding, partially from bond issue approved in November 1972,
<br />b~Uance to be assessed against abutting properties. Result of,poll of property
<br />; owners showing those for and against the projects was included, in the memo.
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />, Councilman Murray wondered about the large percentage of property owners not re-
<br />'sponding to the poll on the Norkenzie Road and West Amazon Drive projects, and why
<br />: Echo Hollow Road project was not on the list. There was no explanation for the
<br />, type of response other than with regard to Norkenzie Road, the City has been pur-
<br />: chasing right-of-way for that project for some time a}'~4Jt. is. felt property owners
<br />alongdthat street ;re aw~;e that the project~ill:g; ahea'd. ItfNaSe~~l'ained
<br />that the Echo Hollow project has already been initiated and bids called with
<br />public hearing scheduled for the April 23 COuncil me~ting.
<br />I '
<br />,
<br />
<br />!Mr~ Williams moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to authorize staff to proceed with design
<br />:of projects listed, but that work does not commence until a 'decision is reached on
<br />th~ Echo Hollow project.
<br />
<br />, :::r~ making the motion Mr. Williams explained that he did not feel there was any
<br />!point in proceeding on these projects in view of the opposition until a decision
<br />is made on Echo Hollow. Manager wasn't convinced the projects under consideration
<br />; should be decided as one issue because of different factors - p~blic acceptance of
<br />: the Norkenzie project is much greater than it would appear, opposi tion on the Oak- ,
<br />'way project to a great extent is because of assessing for street. paving on both
<br />, sides of corner lots. Public Works Director informed the Council that in all
<br />: probability ~hey will be asked to authorize condemnation on four properties for
<br />: Norkenzie right-of-way, referring to the 24% opposing the project in the poll.
<br />;Mr. Williams felt the fundamental issue was whether to inflict cost of street con-
<br />istruction for the good of the entire community upon owners of property abutting
<br />I those streets who do not want the improvement. He felt when the Echo Hollow deci-
<br />sion is made, an answer about whether to continue on these projects would become
<br />clearer.
<br />
<br />le
<br />
<br />: Vote was taken on the motion as stated. Motion carried, Councilmen Williams,
<br />'Hershner, Wood, and Mqyor Anderson voting aye; Counci lmen Beal, Campbell, and
<br />Murray ~C?!ing no . ""'-,., ,,_______
<br />
<br />Comm
<br />, 4/18/73
<br />Approve"
<br />
<br />Allen Whitting~on, 585 Oakway Road, said he was not opposed to widening Oakway
<br />Road but he did object to the ,curb design and allowance for bicycle path and
<br />removal of parking. He fe~t bicycles should be behind the ~urb, separated from
<br />auto traffic. He also suggested use of revenues from bicycle'licenses to offset
<br />some of,the cost of arterial street.improvements, thereby lessening the cost 'for
<br />arterials borne by abutting properties. , Mr. Whittington thought':the 't'raffic frbm'
<br />Oakway 'toCoburg should be carried on a merging lane rather than stopping,
<br />thereby preventing conflict with pedestrians and bicycles. Manager noted that
<br />abutting propertiE?s will not' be assessed for the width to accommodate bicycles
<br />on Oakway Road. And Mrs. Beal called attention to the",,9:tudy on assessment
<br />policy now underway .~.. '.
<br />
<br />M.
<br />
<br />Legislation .
<br />1. Response Time re: City Position - Copies of memo from Jim Luce, legislative
<br />analyst, were previously distributed to Council members. Mr. Luce pointed out
<br />the problem of not being'able to state the City's position on legislation in
<br />hearings because of Council's recent resolution requiring its approval of
<br />statements on behalf of the City. Time does not allow participating at hear-
<br />ings in Salem because of delay in getting to the Council for discussion. It
<br />was suggested a Council subcommittee could meet weekly, possibly on Monday
<br />afternoons when copies of bills arrive, and give a tentative position subject
<br />to later Council approval or veto. The League of Oregon Cities looks to
<br />Eugene as a leading ci ty invol ved in the legislati ve process in Salem and in
<br />this session the city has not been able to fulfill that role.
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />\l.~
<br />
<br />4/30/73 - 9
<br />
|