06/09/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

come to the specific attention of all neighboring partICIpants did not mean that there hadn't been repeated public discussion and that its impact on the community ... had not been through the public process. He commented on the danger involved in ,., driving the intersection and said he felt strongly that it should be improved. Councilwoman Shirey thought a better process should be provided to bring all im- provement projects to the attention of all those interested so they could be heard. She felt the citizens were trying to express their concern about projects that were occurring and she definitely wanted public input. She wondered how the time element would be affected should there be postponement at this meeting to give opportunity to work with those people wanting to be heard. Assitant Manager said if the Council wanted to review the project with the neigh- borhood, presenting drawings, showing amount of right-of-way acquired to provide for left-turn lanes, etc., the matter could be postponed to the June 23 Council meeting without losing the county funds. However, if the idea was to postpone for the purpose of possible redesign or modification of the project, that would be impossible in a two-week period given the work load in the public works department. He thought there would be increasing degradation of the neighborhood if the inter- section was not improved, that traffic would be seeking alternate routes thereby increasing travel on side streets. He recalled that several months ago hearings were suggested beyond those legally required and it was his understanding at that time that the Council did not wish to pursue that other than this hearing when contract for the work was awarded. Assistant Manager continued that staff finds itself in a dilemma trying to develop criteria for the types of projects to be taken to the neighborhood associations until it becomes a technical question of deciding one intersection over another. He said that right-of-way was already acquired for this improvement at a compara- tively high cost to deal with a traffic problem as it exists. The project does ~ not anticipate any improvement farther south on Willamette. It is the tag end . of a process, he said, which has been under study for some time and to which the Council and budget committee made commitment. In response to Councilwoman Shirey, Assistant Manager said the cost of the project had been reduced by about $60,000 to $80,000 since it was first brought to the Council because of redesign and reduction in the amount of right-of-way required. Councilman Hamel felt most of the complaints were from people living north of 29th in the Friendly area. There were people living in the area longer than five or ten years who were not objecting, he said, and he thought a vote should be cast on the contract award. Councilman Murray stated his understanding that notification of this project did not go to the neighborhood area not because of the nature of the project but because of timing of recognition of the group. Assistant Manager answered that there was obligation to inform neighborhoods of new installations. In this case, it was up- grading an existing intersection only - introducing left-turn lanes, upgraind signalization, and generally trying to improve aesthetics by reducing the number of street light poles. So staff felt the nature of the change did not require neighborhood notification. Councilwoman Shirey wondered if it would be possible to notify groups of these types of projects and let them decide whether they want to become involved. And she asked those present objecting to the project whether they wanted only clarification of the project that could be accomplished in two weeks, or if they wanted complete iIIl.. . postponement in order to conduct studies and further hearings. Assistant Manager ~ said it would be difficult to decide on which project to give notification. In- formation is given to neighborhoods from the public works department so there can 6/9/75 - 6 ~o&