CC Minutes - 01/16/02 Work Session

Home Browse Search

better address the project goals and objectives than the addition of more lanes. She said it would be even better if the concept was extended toward 6th and 7th avenues to the edge of downtown. Mr. Pap~ said the council should reconsider the project goals. He wanted to do more than merely provide access to the courthouse; he wanted to create a situation that invited people to the area and got people to the river. He asked what had happened to earlier consideration of a pedestrian underpass crossing Franklin Boulevard, and suggested a water feature that might enhance the option and help open up the area. Mr. Pap~ suggested a design option that allowed the courthouse to cross Mill Street in a plaza treatment, acknowledging the security concerns such an approach raised. Mr. Pap~ asked about coordination between agencies. Ms. Laurence assured him that the agencies were working together and moving forward. In response to his comments, she said that a pedestrian underpass would require ramps that were as long as those that would be required for the ramp associated with the Iow-build option, creating the loss of frontage. There were also security issues related both to the courthouse and to pedestrian safety. Mr. Pap~ suggested that one option was to bridge the river north of Hilyard Street and connect to Centennial Boulevard, diverting traffic away from the area. He acknowledged the additional expense. Mr. Meisner found Mr. Papa's suggestion interesting. He said that the use of the term "connect" had different meanings, which were reflected in the options. He said that the courthouse could remain an island and be connected with a bridge or underpass, and it could be connected by integrating it better with downtown by eliminating barriers. He was interested in the latter approach. Mr. Meisner said that the site was surrounded on all sides now by various busy transportation corridors and by the river, which served as impenetrable barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists. Mr. Meisner thought some refinement of the 6th and 7th option was the best approach. He appreciated that the staff appeared to be considering the area as though there were nothing there now. Mr. Rayor commended the presentation. He said he did not understand why the 5th Avenue connection would allow an at-grade pedestrian intersection at 8th Avenue but the Iow-build option did not. Ms. Laurence said that such a connection would require the addition of lanes for stacking, at least one and potentially two. Mr. Rayor expressed concern about the impact of running a road parallel to the train tracks, as he perceived it would put the courthouse site inside the downtown street grid but actually cut off the University of Oregon and the courthouse from the river. Ms. Laurence responded that the options were designed to "toggle" between two issues: how much traffic the City wants on Mill Street, and where else the traffic would go. Mr. Russ added that the connection was included because the "devil was in the details" and staff did not yet know all the details of the quality of the connection and whether the traffic volumes anticipated would be too much. He said that staff needed to do more work with ©D©T to determine whether it would work. Mr. Rayor suggested it might be possible to put a pedestrian crossing across both th the railroad and 6th and 7 extension so that one of the ramps was in the courthouse site and the other was at grade. Mr. Rayor said he wanted further development of the options and advocated for a working group process similar to the Beltline Decisions group. He said the council and staff needed to keep in mind the policy work done by the downtown visioning group. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 16, 2002 Page 3 Work Session