06/22/1981 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

proposal but the neighbors rejected it. Other proposals were considered but the e neighbors could not agree on them. Ms. Miller stated that in one letter the council received regarding the survey, questions were raised as to whether some of the survey information was compiled from telephone inquiries. Mr. Hanks responded that both telephone and public meeting comments were included. Staff tallied how people felt. Joe Hessler, Public Works, stated that in conducting this survey count, staff had mailed a questionnaire to residents, and written responses, as well as telephone responses, were included. Ms. Miller asked if the phone comments were in response to a survey that staff had mailed out. Mr. Hessler stated that they were. Mr. Lindberg asked if the survey responses in response to the questionnaire were similar to the unsolicited responses at the public hearings. Mr. Hessler stated that the staff hearing results were slightly more positive toward making the diverter permanent. Mr. Hanks added that both results showed that the majority of residents were in favor. Ms. Smith asked if people were told that this street would be reopened after 18th and Chambers was improved. She noted that she had received a letter stating that someone had been told that. Mr. Hanks stated that to his know- ledge, no one was told that. People were told that the situation would be re-evaluated but that this was part of the diverter process. He feels the misunderstanding may have come from comments made before the widening. They had felt they would reconsider this closure after the 18th and Chambers intersection was improved but that was never decided. Any change in the street closures would be subject to council action. Public hearing was opened. e Jacqueline Thomas, 2155 West 22nd Avenue, stated that she is against the perma- nent closure and is in favor of 24th Avenue being reopened. She feels it is dangerous now on 22nd Avenue for children and animals. She feels 24th Avenue should be reopened since it was designed for arterial traffic. Another route would be needed if it were closed permanently. She would suggest reopening it on at least a trial basis. Stephen Stone, 1787 West 24th Avenue, stated that he lives east of the closure. The same sltuation exists on Arthur as there was between Arthur and Garfield with the grades and turns. It is the same situation that residents on Arthur objected to. He is in favor of the permanent closure. Robert Smit, 1824 West 24th Avenue, provided photos to the council. He stated that the incline of the hill is a problem with cars racing by and being scraped on the pavement due to the hills. He noted that the photographs he presented to the council showed the traffic hazard. He would like this street to be closed. He lives near the closure. He would, however, like the signing corrected for better visibility and more accuracy. There needs to be emergency vehicle access but now motorcycles travel down that street at about 40 mph. There are bar types of closures that could be used to stop traffic, except for emergency vehicles. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 22, 1981 Page 2