05/26/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Obie referred to the advisability of locating bike paths off-grade and separate from automobile traffic. He asked what is being done in this respect on new arterials. Mr. Nordgaard said that off-grade routes are more expensive to construct and maintain and that current practice is to construct an asphalt street and install five-foot-wide concrete gutters on each side, placing the bike routes on this five feet of concrete. He said that the statistics used by his office indicated that striped lanes are very safe. Ms. Miller referred to the Glenwood Connector routing. She did not understand the routing proposed or the rationale for building a path in this area. Mr. Nordgaard explained that this is a route designed to serve people who live in Glenwood and that there is currently no convenient street route for these people. He indicated that the specific route has not yet been determined. Ms. Miller asked if this was intended to replace the proposed South Riverbank Bike Path to Springfield. Mr. Nordgaard said that this was not the case, and that the Riverbank Path was still planned. The public hearing was opened. There being no testimony presented, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to approve the 1980 annual review of the Eugene Bikeways Master Plan. Roll call vote; motion carried unanimously. E. Council-Initiated Improvement Resolution Regarding Street Paving and Sidewalk Construction on Crescent Avenue from Gilham Road to Coburg Road (memo, map distributed) 4It Mr. Gleason asked Bert Teitzel, City Engineer, to give the staff report. Mr. Teitzel explained that this is a council-initiated improvement. He indicated that there had been a staff hearing with property owners in the area on April 15, 1981, and that there would be a third hearing at the contract award stage. The project calls for a 46-foot-wide street with curbs and sidewalks. The pavement striping is for two bicycle lanes, two automobile lanes, and a center turn lane. Mr. Teitzel indicated that the issues raised at the staff hearing had included concern that on-street parking would be removed. In response to this, staff had adjusted the plans by eliminating the center turn lane in portions of the street to allow for some on-street parking. Mr. Teitzel indicated that property owners were also concerned about double-frontage assessments. He noted that the council had discussed the double-frontage issue at some length at the May 11, 1981, council meeting. There was concern that the project would create an increase in traffic and an increase in speed, because improvements would basically create a shortcut from Co burg Road to Delta Highway. Mr. Teitzel said that staff's response to that concern was that traffic will probably increase anyway, regardless of the improvements. Ms. Wooten asked how many individual property owners were involved in the 1,100 linear feet of double-frontage lots. Mr. Teitzel responded that this was about nine or ten lots. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 26, 1981 Page 7