CC Minutes - 04/11/05 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Bettman asked why the on-street parking would be removed. She felt the on-street parking was a benefit to both residents and businesses. Continuing, Councilor Bettman observed that the stormwater utility funds were included in the funding mechanism. She felt the funds were more like a user fee and did not seem to be an appropriate funding mechanism for the project. Councilor Pap6 complimented Ms. Cahill. He said he attended one of the public information sessions. He related that the City had done a good job of publicizing the meeting and many people attended. He concurred with much of the testimony given at the present hearing. He thought a perfectly good bicycle path was already available south of the wastewater plant. He wished to know what the cost would be if one sidewalk was removed and if the mm lane was eliminated from the project. He asked if all of the participants would be assessed should one sidewalk be removed from the project. He also requested that staff explain what made up the engineering and administrative costs cited in one piece of testimony. He agreed with the recommendation that at least the work on the end of the road on which the businesses were located be conducted at night. He recalled that several businesses closed when the work on the Ferry Street Bridge had been done. He wondered if any traffic calming elements had been looked into. Councilor Pap6 stressed that the City needed to keep River Avenue open because it was one of the few streets that crossed the Beltline Road in the River Road area. Councilor Solomon stated that the post office had a large frontage on River Avenue and asked if it was possible to assess them. Ms. Cahill replied that the City could not assess the post office. Councilor Solomon remarked that this was unfair given the amount of street frontage it had. Councilor Solomon acknowledged the testimony that indicated that people with properties on River Avenue were largely not conceptually opposed to the street improvements and merely wanted the scope of the project scaled down to better match the use of the street. She said they did not need "all of the frills" as it was "not an exciting street," but they did deserve safety. Councilor Taylor was alarmed at the prospect that stormwater utility fees might be used to help fund the project. City Manager Taylor drew the council's attention to the bid, made in July 2004, and pointed out that the successful low bidder was willing to extend the bid through May 2005. He said many of the options the council would like to consider involving alternatives to the design standards would require the City to re-bid the project and this could significantly affect the cost of bids. 5. PUBLIC HEARING AND POSSIBLE ACTION An Ordinance Adopting Hazardous Substance User Fees for the Fiscal Year Commencing July 1, 2005 City Manager Taylor said the ordinance reflected the council's desire to retain the existing fee structure for one more year. Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. Seeing no one present to speak, she closed the hearing. MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 2005 Page 15 Regular Session