03/24/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Paving strcets in Downtown ERA Phase III 6th, Olive to Oak; 7th, Charnel ton to Oak; Willamettc, 6th to 8th; Oak, 6th to 7th; Pearl, 8th to Broadway; Pearl, Broadway to 11th; 11th, Willamette to Charnelton; sanitary and storm sewer in north/ south alley from 7th to 8th between Olive and Willamette Paving Royal from Louis Lane to Candlelight Drive Paving Barger from Highway 99 to Ohio Sanitary sewer - Skyline Loop annexation area Hawkins Lane from 18th to Highland Oaks e The projects involved $518,200 in city costs, $855,000 in ERA and FAU funds, and $1,014,700 assessed costs. City Engineer pointed out on a map where the improvements would occur and gave some background on each. Councilman Bradley asked why streets in the downtown area already paved were being paved again, whether there was something wrong with the original streets. City Engineer explained that the projects werc included in the central business district urban renewal project and accomplishing those improvements now would allow the city to take advantage of available Federal funds rather than waiting for the streets to deteriorate and having to replace them at some future time. Manager added that the widths on some of the streets were inadequate. He said those listed in this proposal would complete the adopted ERA plan. It was de- cided to do that work at this time with Federal funds to avoid local maintenance or replacement expense for another twenty years or so. Councilman Haws asked for an explanation of use of FAU funds (Federal Aid Urban System projects) as shown in the project outlines. He wondered if these were the funds residents in the Royal Avenue and Barger Drive areas were lead to be- lieve would be applied against assessments. Mr. Teitzel answered that the city anticipated applying Federal funds on the Barger Drive improvement and at one point the neighborhood group was told that. However, the amount of Federal.funds available did not amount to enough to make an appreciable difference in the assessments because they were to be spread to projects in the entire county, so it was decided they would be applied only against city costs on the project. He said that the process for applying for Federal funds for the Barger Drive right-of-way acquisition was so involved as to cause further delay in the project so it was decided to switch those funds to the Royal Avenue improvement. However, in trading the projects the city tvould still have available the same dollar amount for the Barger project. And application of those funds to the city's costs would help balance the 1972 bond issue so that inflationary costs could be met without depleting bond revenues. Also, it was possible to reduce the basis for assess- ment from a 36-foot width to.a 28-foot width. Councilman Haws asked why the improvement of Royal Avenue was not being extended to the city limits rather. than ending at Candlelight Drive. He also inquired about a Belt Line overpass at Royal. Mr. Teitzel said the improvement had not been extended farther because there was no development in that area and it was felt owners of large vacant parcels would probably object. He said there had been no determination yet about an overpass at Royal Avenue, that intersection with Belt Line would remain signalized. The proposed Highway 126 extension would affect this intersection, he said, making it difficult to resolve until there was a Highway 126 decision. Manager added that although there was a reduction from 36-foot to 28-foot width as the basis for assessment, property owners probably would not be saved too much in actual cost because of rising costs during the period the project was delayed. e Mr. Murray moved seconded by Mr. Williams to initiate the projects as listed. Motion carried unanimously. Comm 3/19/75 Approve 3/24/75 - 9 13~