12/16/1985 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.T M I NUT E S . City Council Work Session Wilder Room/Conference Center December 16, 1985 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Brian Obie, Mayor; Cynthia Wooten, Debra Ehrman, Emily Schue, Roger Rutan, Freeman Holmer, Jeff Miller, Richard Hansen, Ruth Bascom, councilors; Mike Gleason, City Manager; Dave Whitlow, Christine Andersen, Barb Bellamy, Dave Reinhard, Mike Weishar, Nathan Duke, Kirk McKinley, Susan Brody, Lee Beyer, staff; Jim Gix, State Highway Department; Jim Boyd, Register~Guard; John Se1ix, KUGN. The meeting was called to order at 5:40 p.m. by Ms. Wooten; Mr. Obie conducted the meeting. I. 6TH AND 7TH AVENUE CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES Mr. Gleason distributed a summary sheet entitled "History of the 6th/7th Extension. II In 1976-77, when discussions were held regarding which corridors and models would be included in the T-2000 Plan, 6th and 7th avenues were - adopted as the primary corridor for development. By 1983, staff committees were appointed, and as a result, the State Highway Division looked at all the alternatives for the project in order to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. The City Council is now responsible for recommending an alternative to the State for review. It will submit a report to the City Council for the alternative chosen and that alternative will be the one proposed to the voters. The law does not allow the city to vote on an alignment before the EIS is approved. Several meetings back, the City Council established a sequence which would allow the project to be voted on in time to be a part of the State's Six-Year Highway Improvement Program. Mr. Reinhard was introduced and referred the council to the memo entitled "Evaluation of the 6th/7th Avenue Extension Alternatives" with matrix attached. This report was prepared at the request of the City Council in order to compare several alternatives at the east end of the project, between Seneca and Highway 99. The report included a general discussion of the alternatives, discussion of evaluation criteria, specific information about each alternative, a summary statement, and recommendations. Using the maps and the evaluation sheet, Mr. Reinhard explained each alternative. He continued by going through the matrix chart attached to the report. Mr. Reinhard commented that the higher cost for the elevated portion of Alternative One would be reduced by lessening cost for right-of-way acquisitions and traffic signals. Mr. Gix added that he estimated the additional cost to be $2-1/2 million to $3 million. . MINUTES--City Council Work Session December 16, 1985 Page 1