08/22/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

minutes of July 5, 1977 be adopted by reference thereto; that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, . with unanimous consent of the Council; and that enactment be considered at this time. Motion carried unanimously, with Councilor Smith abstaining, and the bill was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, that the bill be approved and given final passage. Roll call vote. All Councilors present voting aye, except Councilor Smith abstaining, the bill was declared passed and numbered 18043. C. Bethel-Danebo Neighborhood Refinement Plan. 1-B-5 Recommended by'Planning Commission June 7,1977, that Council con- sider second and third alternatives. Manager noted this item related to the drainage, land use, and access south of Elmira Road between Beltline and Roosevelt Boulevard. Pat Decker said staff was asking City Council for tentative approval for policy and selection of an alternative, with staff to come back to Council for resolution to that effect. She reveiwed Alternatives 2 and 3 for Council. She said the proposals were for a drainage channel and industrial arterial to serve the area south of Elmira Road, defined by Elmira Road on the north, Highway 99 on the east, the Coos-Bay, branch of Southern Pacific Railroad on the south, and Beltline Road on the west. She said most of the drainage problems in the Bethel-Danebo area had been resolved, with this being the one e remaining. At the present time, there are four major subdivisions awaiting resolution of the project. The area has three major planning problems: 1) the need. for separation and delineation of industrial and residential land-use areas; 2) the need for a major drainage facility; and 3) the need for improved access to the industrial portions of the area to better serve existing industry and provide alternatives to industrial traffic using residential streets. She said of the two alternatives being proposed to Council, both would separate the residential area to the north from the industrial area to the south. With Alternative 2, both facilities would fall into the same alignment following existing zoning. The drainage facility would be located north of the roadway to separate residential areas from the roadway and the industrial development to the south. This alternative would leave an estimated three acres of undeveloped residentially-zoned land south of the proposed facilities and unsepar- ated from adjacent heavy industrial development. Alternative 3 is very similar in its proposal except the arterial splits from the drainage ditch to use the right-of-way in Cross Street. It would require some additional acquisition of right-of-way. A cost estimate sheet was distributed to Council comparing the esti- mated costs for Alternatives 2'and 3. She noted there would be more cost assessment with Alternative 3 because property on Cross Street would have to be assessed. , I . 8/22/77--8 ~38