04/11/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e In response to a question, Mr. Hibschman stated that the DC wished to start the second and third phases of the improvement project after January 1, 1985; therefore, the proposals would be presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council in late summer. Councilor Ball questioned how the $300,000 deficit in the tax allocation fund would be balanced. Mr. Hibschman stated that rough projections had been performed for five years and that, given a reasonable level of capital improvement funding, he did not expect any carry- over of the deficit other than a reduction of the operating reserve amount. In response to another question, Mr. Hibschman stated that the period after January 1, 1985, would be the earliest the subsequent phases could be started based on the approval process, required hearings and the design process. Councilor Hansen questioned the action of reducing 8th Avenue to three lanes. Mr. Hibschman stated that four lanes of traffic created a barrier to pedes- trian movement; therefore, the reduction from four to three lanes would encourage traffic to move slower. He said the DC considered this proposal an important part in linking the downtown with the 5th Avenue area. He acknow- ledged that there has been no apparent problems with pedestrian crossings or vehicular traffic on 8th Avenue in the downtown area. Councilor Hansen stated that one of the major changes in the six-month extension given to the Price Development Company was to include the land to the east of the original project. Given that the shopping center might locate in that area, he asked what impact this action would have on the 8th Avenue project. Mr. Hibschman stated that staff has discussed the impact of the plantings of the mall work on any devel- opment on that parcel and did not feel that it would limit the development potential of the lot. He stated that the trees could be moved if necessary. He felt that any change of this nature would be an insignificant amount of the project budget. Councilor Smith asked if the funding for the 8th and Willamette project could be allocated to the 10th and Willamette project if the council decided it should be given higher priority. Mr. Hibschman stated the stipulation for the $150,000 was that it be used in the completion of the Central Eugene Project. He did not believe that a satisfactory proposal could be made to reallocate the funds to the 10th and Willamette project. While he stated that HUD per- sonnel had not been contacted on this issue, he said that staff has reviewed the language of the 1976 closeout agreement. Ms. Smith stated that she was con- cerned with the piecemeal approach of the project. She felt that the staff should pursue the opportunity of using the funds for the 10th and Willamette project. In addition, she said the council should be given an overall concept of the Downtown Plan. Mr. Gleason stated that the City has had the closeout money since 1976. He stated that HUD was not pleased with the use of the money; he felt confident that HUD would not allow the money to be used to tear up part of the mall. He stressed that the City had entered into a stipulated agreement to complete the mall. In response to a question, Mr. Hibschman stated the DC understood that opening Willamette Street between 10th and 11th Avenues was a priority of the City Council. He said the DC has recommended that the 8th and Willamette project precede the opening of Willamette Street at 10th Avenue because it wanted to follow through with the project started last year. He said the DC has also directed staff to take steps to develop the 10th and Willamette MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 1984 Page 8