11/17/1986 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Roll call vote; the motion carried 5:2 with Councilors Schue, Miller, Bascom, Rutan, and Hansen voting aye and e Councilors Ehrman and Holmer voting nay; the bill was declared passed without the emergency clause (and became Ordinance No. 19426). VII. AMENDMENT TO CDBG STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced consideration of a recommendation from the Community Development Committee (CDC) concerning changes to the Community Development Block Grant 1986-87 Statement of Objectives. He said the Federal government decreased the City's block grant allocation and then reallocated some funds. The reallocation was $186,000. Mr. Miller said the CDC considered the $186,000 to be "one-timell funds and the committee responded to some extraordinary needs in the community. He said the committee did not intend to set a precedent for the future allocation of Block Grant Funds. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to approve the amendment to the FY86-87 Community Development Block Grant final Statement of Objectives. Respondi ng to a question from Ms. Bascom, Mr. Mill er sa i d CDC members discussed the 18 percent cost for administration of the reallocated funds. He said CDC members decided that administrative costs.for such programs are high because of technical requirements and unanimously approved the recommendation. e The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. VIII. FINDINGS/MINUTES OF HEARING OFFICIAL AND RESOLUTION FOR GILHAM ROAD IMPROVEMENTS City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the discussion. Les Lyl e of the Public Works Department gave the staff report. He said the improvements to Gilham Road include 46-foot-wide paving, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, and street lights from Crescent Avenue to Honeywood Street. He revi ewed the existing conditions on Gilham Road. He said the improvements are supported by 122 parents in the area who signed two petitions, the 4-J School District, the Bicycle Committee, the Cal Young Neighborhood Group, and the local Parent- Teacher Association. The proj ect is in the current Capi ta 1 Improvement Program (CIP). Mr. Lyle said a remonstrance petition signed by 40 percent of the property owners who will be assessed for the project was received. He said 50 percent of the owners who signed the remonstrance petition are subject to petitions which obligate them to participate in the future improvement of Gilham Road. He said the signers of the remonstrance petition are concerned about the costs of the project and the impact of the road on abutting properties. To address the impact of the improvements, the City has asked for five property owners to participate in the design of the improvements. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 17, 1986 Page 5