Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ms. Cahill asked if the proposal intended the bicycle lanes to be painted lanes on the street. Mr. Hill <br />affirmed that it would be that until the east side of the Post Office and then at that point, a bicycle path <br />would be placed on the south side of the road. <br /> <br />Mr. SameI' pointed out that the standard for a Mixed Use sidewalk was a 12-foot width. He reiterated <br />that he had measured the road and determined there was room for the bicycle facility. <br /> <br />4. Crosswalks at the east end of the Post office, Ross Lane and at the east end Bicycle path <br />across from the Orowheat Store and possibly at the Veteran's Administration building. <br /> <br />Mr. Hill noted that the crosswalks were listed in the proposal as being raised and the property owners <br />had decided to strike this point. <br /> <br />5. No landscaped islands or planters on any portion of the three lane road; street trees to be <br />planted at the west end only in the setback sidewalk area to the east end of the Post Office. <br /> <br />Mr. Meeker observed that a 12-foot bicycle path on the south side of the road after the Post Office <br />would likely have to be maintained by the Wastewater Division Facility. Mr. Hill concurred. <br /> <br />Mr. Samet pointed out that the group had voted to propose a full build-out of the road to Ross Lane at <br />the last meeting. Mr. Howard responded that the proposal was a concept and could be changed. <br /> <br />Mr. Spain thought the City Attorney had clearly said that whatever proposal the group arrived at had to <br />meet certain standards and this was new information. He underscored that everyone wanted some kind <br />of connectivity and the property owners had attempted to forge a compromise. <br /> <br />Mr. Hill commented that the reason the property owners had proposed to stop the full sidewalk <br />development at the Post Office was that most pedestrian and bicycle traffic went no further than that <br />because traversing the area in front of the Wastewater Facility was unpleasant. <br /> <br />Ms. Rojas thought it would be good to review the RRCO proposal. <br /> <br />Ms. Vaughn conveyed her appreciation for the work that the property owners had done. She felt the <br />previous vote to build to Ross Lane had been made before all of the information from the City Attorney <br />was in. She indicated that she was comfortable with the proposal. <br /> <br />Ms. Damron provided an overview of the RRCO proposal, which consisted of four options: <br />1. Have no road project; wait for OOOT decision; <br />2. Maintain the current road temporarily with a pavement overlay until OooT decision <br />determined long-ternl need; <br />3. Redefine construction project boundaries; <br />4. Go forward with the project as planned by City of Eugene engineering staff. <br /> <br />MINUTES-River A venue Stakeholder Group- <br />Public Works Department <br /> <br />October S, 2005 <br /> <br />Page 4 <br />