11/25/1985 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Avenue. Mr. Reinhard replied that this had been considered in the early e deliberations. He also said that nine businesses would be displaced in Alternative #1 and 18 businesses displaced in Alternative #2. Mr. Gleason summarized the need for the arterial project. A decision was made to develop the city towards Greenhill and the Willow Creek basin instead of 1-5. Development on 1-5 for the transportation system was not unacceptable to the State. Willow Creek is a feeder area and the areas surrounding it will be developed too. Mr. Reinhard added that the urban growth boundary is at Greenhill Road. Mr. Miller asked about the rerouting of Alternative #1 up the Amazon Canal and along the the railroad track. Mr. Reinhard said that the Planning Commission has recommended this change, will submit it to the State, and continue to discuss it with the property owners. The council will be receiving the details of the change. Mr. Reinhard reiterated the conclusions about the possibility of an elevated roadway in the industrial park on the east end of the route for the benefit of Ms. Bascom. He said that the State is looking at this, but City staff has not yet received a report. Item #4 on the memorandum addresses wetlands. Mr. Reinhard pointed out the Bertelsen Slough and Stewart Pond on the map and explained that measures would need to be taken to protect these from development. Perhaps, it would be required that the State purchase them. Mr. Hansen asked about acquiring other ~ wetlands and Mr. Reinhard said that even though the Federal agencies interpret the law to mean that destroyed wetlands be replaced with creation of new ones, the City would prefer to preserve those already existing. Item #5 on the memorandum refers to the provision for the Amazon Fern Ridge Bike Path. Mr. Reinhard said that the Planning Commission wants to emphasize this during the design process. Mr. McKinley explained that the reason for moving so rapidly on this project was to be able to have a decision in time for input into the State's six-year highway improvement program update which is done every two years. After the December 18 public hearing by the State, they will issue a hearing study report which will include the recommended alignment by late January or early February. Then the City Council will need to call for a vote in March. Ms. Bascom expressed her appreciation for the explanation of what a limited access roadway means and she felt that the public would be benefited by this kind of system, rather than a freeway. Ms. Ehrman asked if the 6th and 7th widening project anticipated this change and Mr. Reinhard said, yes. Mr. Hansen asked if the State would support a one-way traffic system and Mr. Gleason responded that the justification for building a state highway was to connect to another state system which ultimately connects to the freeway. Funding would be questionable if the State planned an arterial for City use only. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 25, 1985 Page 6