05/23/1983 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e Mayor Keller asked how many adjustments had been made to the original proposal in the past eighteen months based on citizen input received. Mr. Teitzel said the original proposal for the Washington to Fillmore section called for a 26-foot wide roadway with a four-foot wide sidewalk; he added that the area has room for a 28-foot wide roadway and a five-foot wide sidewalk as is requested in the present proposal. He said the plans have been adjusted as late as last week in an attempt to develop the best plan. Mr. Teitzel said the proposal is a modification of the normal 36-foot wide roadway and that one of the two original sidewalks has been deleted. Mr. Teitzel said the issue of removing trees is only involved in the Washington to Fillmore section. Councilor Wooten asked for the comparative traffic counts between Lorane Highway and Gilham Road. James Hanks, City Traffic Engineer, said the area north of Crescent on Gilham Road has less traffic than the Lorane section, but that the approximately 500 cars per day is not a significant number. Councilor Lindberg asked whether the gravel walkway as suggested was feasible. Mr. Teitzel commented that a gravel walkway is seen as a temporary measure by the staff and that it would require more maintenance; therefore, adding additional cost to the initial cost of installation. He stated that the walkway on Gilham Road was installed by the County. In regard to questions by the council, Mr. Teitzel said that no growth projections for the area involved had been made, but that the main thrust of the proposal is for the safety of the children in the area. He added that the suggested stop sign would create a problem because Lorane Highway is the main street and people would tend to run the stop sign. He added that in July 19B2 the school district had stated 50-60 children could potentially use the walkway, but now most are bused or driven to school in cars. He said the district transportation department said that it would probably eliminate one bus route if the sidewalk were installed. Councilor Obie stated that this was not a zoning issue, but that it was a long-standing issue and that he could understand the feelings of the residents. He said he believed the $90,000 assessment to be a major factor and compared this situation to the Goodpasture Island situation in that the residents are against the proposal. He said that 75 percent of the traffic on the roadway is probably by the residents and therefore is not a significant number. He added that the proposed improvement will be easily done, but that the improvement of the rest of the Lorane Highway will call for substantial cut and fill and will change the nature of the neighborhood. Mr. Obie said he is empathic to the residents and cannot support a council-initiated proposal that has no support from the residents. Councilor Wooten stated that she could not support the proposal at this time and suggested that some interim work such as the stop sign and the gravel walkway could be done to protect the children in the area. Councilor Ball said that, in looking at the safety aspect of the situation, there is a considerable difference between a gravel shoulder and an elevated sidewalk. He stated that he appreciated the input of the school district and realized the burden to be placed on the property owners, but he would support e the proposal. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 23, 1983 Page 10