06/09/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

-- negotiations and the project was part of the city's capital outlay program, re- vised several times, with completion scheduled for October 1974 under agreement with the county. Extension of that deadline to July I was given by the county with the understanding there would be no more extensions, since other cities in the county needed the county money provided for in the agreement if Eugene would not be using it. Mr. Allen further explained the problem of trying to project the highest capacity of this intersection without the ESATS work being finalized. However, he considered the improvement very important to the community because of the number of accidents at that intersection and its being a continual source of complaints. He thought the proposed improvement would withstand ESATS finalization and that it should proceed. In response to Councilmen Haws and Murray, he said there had been 44 accidents investigated within the intersection in the last two years, 19 of which involved injuries - many others were not investigated - and that the inter- section had been one of the top ten most accident prone intersections in the city for the last three years. Councilwoman Beal wondered what would be accomplished by delaying the project. Councilman Murray said his understanding was that those people expressing concerns felt more public input was needed before a decision was made whether to proceed. Ms. Barkan said that people traveling through that intersection, although realizing it was crowded and not the safest in the city, felt they should be convinced by actual figures that the proposed improvement was really needed. She said the Friendly Area Neighbors in considering their refinement plan would like to see if the widening really would accomplish anything. They were wondering how people far- ther south on Willamette would react if in a sense a freeway was being created, what percentage of accidents occurred on weekends, whether they were caused by "kids traveling the gut," etc. e Councilman Keller said the main concern of most cItIzens living beyond that inter- section was the safety factor. He noted the project had been proposed for longer than the neighborhood group had been in existence and that it was part of the plan- ning program. Delay would be rather costly, he thought, if the county funds were lost, and he thought the project should proceed because of the accident record, that it was unsafe not only for autos but for bikes and pedestrians as well. Councilman Bradley asked if the public hearing on the bond issue was the only hear- ing on this project. Mr. Allen answered that that was a "called" public hearing. he project was initiated in a Council meeting, an open public meeting, even though not specifically designated as a public hearing. Assistant Manager added that the project did appear in ballot materials distributed to voters at time the bond issue was voted on and that it ~as the subject of considerable deliberation in budget committee meetings. The normal public hearing on a project of this kind is this one, held at the time of contract award. Councilman Bradley thought a policy issue was involved, that there should be the same public hearing process when only city funds were used as when federal money was involved. He suggested revamping the procedure to provide for public hearing before a decision is made on contract award in order to have public input prior to that time. He felt the safety factor had to be weighed against the question of public input in making a decision that would have far-reaching consequences in development of the southern part of the city. He said he would favor postponing the project for public input in order to make an intelligent decision. - Councilman Williams said that in his five years on the Council there was no traffic area in the city that had been discussed more than the 29th and Willamette inter- section. Council had looked at it on tour many times and discussed its potential in terms of traffic beyond that intersection and in planning development in the south hills area. He said the fact that improvement of that intersection had not 6/9/75 - 5 .. ''3"07