Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />and Seed and any others that could be saved without too much cost. She would <br />not accept the alignment of the Design Review Committee although the Committee <br />had done what it was asked to do. <br /> <br />Mayor Obie had realized during the public hearing what a positive impact the <br />project will have on west Eugene. The situation is bad now. Some owners of <br />properties on 6th and 7th avenues are waiting for approval of the project <br />before they improve their own properties. The Design Review Committee worked <br />hard to compromise and win support, but the recommended alignment had not been <br />supported by those who opposed the original design. The recommended alignment <br />would be constructed at great cost to the community. The widening had been <br />planned to avoid a freeway and that seemed a valid reason for the project. <br />Keeping traffic out of neighborhoods and strengthening neighborhoods by <br />building arterials is a positive aspect of the project. Providing 600 new <br />trees which will provide a gateway to the community is a good thing. He <br />favored asking the voters to allow the City to move ahead and construct the <br />streets in a straightened design which would save as many trees as possible. <br />The community should know that the council will make good judgments about the <br />design, if the voters approve the project. <br /> <br />Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Holmer, to accomplish the <br />widening of 6th and 7th avenues in a modified weave within the <br />existing right-of-way in Phases 2 and 3 and with a weave design <br />in Phase 1 and to submit the designs to the voters on March 26, <br />1985. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Sercombe, the City Attorney, said the motion was sufficient for the staff <br />to indicate to the voters what the project involved. He discussed the <br />difference in the prepared ordinance and an ordinance which would conform to <br />the motion. <br /> <br />Answering a question from Ms. Wooten, Ms. Andersen said a modified weave <br />within the existing right-of-way would save the trees across from Gray's Feed <br />and Seed. Of the 44 historic trees from High to Garfield, 18 would be saved. <br />Twenty-six historic trees would be removed. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue was also concerned about the trees across from Gray's Feed and <br />Seed. She did not want the trees cut simply because the eity could not buy a <br />couple of feet of parking lot from Mr. Gray. Ms. Andersen said the City would <br />work with Mr. Gray and perhaps buy some property, but, if that could not be <br />done, a six-foot curb side sidewalk could be constructed in front of Gray's <br />without requiring any additional right-of-way from Mr. Gray. <br /> <br />Roll call vote; the motion carried 6:2. Councilors Schue, <br />Hansen, Holmer, Bascom, Rutan, and Miller voted aye. Councilors <br />Ehrman and Wooten voted nay. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Mr. Sercombe said the third sentence of Section 1 of the prepared ordinance <br />should be changed. Bracketed material should be deleted. Underlined material <br />should be added. The same change should be made in the prepared ordinance. <br /> <br />Presently, at least [13] 26 trees that are defined as historic trees <br />will be required to be removed. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene eity eouncil <br /> <br />February 13, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 8 <br />