05/11/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- Mr. Lindberg noted that several area residents who live downhill from the project had expressed concern about safety. He asked if the guardrail which staff proposed for the project would be sufficient to protect these residents. Mr. Teitzel indicated that staff believes that the proposed guardrail is suffi- cient. He indicated that from an engineering standpoint, there was a question as to whether any guardrail is even needed at this location, but that staff had decided to include the rail to make residents feel more secure. Mr. Lindberg asked if property owners in the area were eligible for low-income/ elderly deferment of assessments. Mr. Teitzel said that staff had not gone into this with the property owners. Mr. Lindberg asked how this process works. Mr. Teitzel explained that after the assessment is levied, property owners need to apply to the City Finance Department for the deferral. He said that eligibility for the deferral is based strictly on income and age. e Mr. Lindberg asked if the deferment alternative could be expanded to apply to a broader group of circumstances. Mr. Keller indic.ated that this was a policy decision which the council should address in the future. Mr. Lindberg felt that the council had identified two policy areas for discussion related to this item. He wondered if decision on the item should be postponed, or if there was a need to resolve the question tonight. Mr. Teitzel responded that the improvements had been initiated out of concern for the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians in the area. He reiterated that if there is a change in the assessment policy, the project must be delayed for six months. He said that the council would have to make the decision on whether safety would be endangered by delaying the project. Mr. Lindberg asked if this is a major corridor for bicycle commuting. Mr. Teitzel responded that this is becoming a major corridor to the river bank bike path system. Mr. Lindberg asked if there were schools in the area, which would make pedestrian danger especially great. Mr. Teitzel responded that this area had not been identified by the School Safety Task Force. He did not believe that students used Goodpasture Island Road very much. Ms. Wooten said that she agreed with Councilors Obie and Lindberg that if there is no great urgency, decision on the item should be postponed until the assess- ment policy issues can be resolved. Mayor Keller opened the public hearing. Speaking about the improvements: Arthur A. Mehas, 1220 Goodpasture Island Road, indicated that when he bought his property, Goodpasture Island was a County road. He indicated that he owns a large amount of frontage on the road and that his bill for the assessment at the rate of $28 per foot would come to $14,000. He indicated that figuring in the interest over ten years, his total expense would be about $28,000. Mr. Mehas noted that throughout its length very few houses front on the road; that his own house is half a canyon away from the road; and that this is not a typical City street. He urged the councilor staff to pursue some alternative way to finance construction of the improvements. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 11, 1981 Page 6