03/11/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" V. CONSIDERATION OF SPYGLASS-GREENVIEW BIKE CONNECTOR 4It (memo, maps, petitions, letters distributed) Mr. Gleason stated staff is recommending that council schedule a public hearing on this item on April 27, 1981, since there is considerable public concern. He would prefer that a staff report be given and questions answered at that time. e - Ms. Smith stated that there is a large degree of interest in this, so it would be appropriate to hold a public hearing. Mr. Lindberg expressed agreement that it is a controversial issue. He is interested in the concept of financing construction of the path through user fees for those living near the path. He asked for clarification on this type of financing. Don Allen, Public Works Director, stated that two citizens came forward and offered to pay $20,000 for land acquisition and construction. Mr. Allen said that this amount would not cover the entire cost; about $12,500 will come from the Public Works budget. Mr. Obie asked when the public hearing would be held. Mr. Gleason responded April 27, 1981. He noted that council could delay the project or send it back to the Planning Department for more information. Mr. Obie stated that he questions holding a public hearing. He feels it would be more logical to delay the project until it is determined if the project will be funded. He would be opposed to holding a public hearing if one is not needed. He feels that the need to hold a public hearing should be determined by Planning once it is decided if the project will be done. A public hearing should then be at the Planning Commission level regarding the Bikeways Master Plan. Ms. Smith asked if the project would be included in the proposed budget. Mr. Gleason responded that it is in the Bikeways Master Plan and it has already had hearings. Mr. Allen noted that the $20,000 could be used for right-of-way acquisition or other costs. Mr. Gleason stated that the right-of-way could be secured with the anticipation of reconstructing the project but the capital improvement decision rests with the council. Ms. Smith stated that the council needs to deal with the issue; however, it makes sense to delay until a deter- mination on funding is made. If it is delayed, the council should tour the area to try to understand the concerns. Mr. Gleason noted that that would be fine but recommended that the decision not be deferred until the budget process is completed. Council could make the determination to at least secure the right- of-way and the question would then be "when," not "if." Mr. Lindberg noted agreement. If it is delayed, it could create problems for the Budget Committee. The council has the obligation to make a decision. The decision should be made based upon information received in the public hearing. The fifth annual review of the Bikeways Master Plan is upcoming. He asked when the most recent development along this route occurred and if the Bicycle Committee has looked at this plan since that time. Mr. Allen responded that when this was first considered by that committee, it was a vacant lot. Houses were built last summer. There is an annual review process of the Master Plan and it has already been through the Planning Commission. Jim Hanks, Traffic Division, stated that this route has been discussed by the Bicycle Committee since the houses were constructed. Mr. Allen noted that the petitions to the council were referred to the Bicycle Committee and that committee recommended leaving the project as currently designated in the plan. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 11, 1981 Page 7