HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B - Res.on River Ave.LIDEUGENE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Action: Resolution 4831 Forming a Local Improvement District for Paving,
Constructing Curbs and Gutters, Sidewalks, Pedestrian Medians, Street Lights, and
Stormwater Drainage on River Avenue from 200 feet East of River Road to 100 feet
West of Beltline Highway
Meeting Date: April 20, 2005 Agenda Item Number: B
Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Michelle Cahill
www. cl. eugene, or. us Contact Telephone Number: 682-6855
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
The council shall consider adoption of a resolution forming a local improvement district (LID) for the
River Avenue Transportation Improvements. The resolution forming a Local Improvement District for
paving, constructing curbs and gutters, sidewalks, pedestrian medians, street lights, and stormwater
drainage on River Avenue from 200 feet east of River Road to 100 feet west of Beltline Highway and
authorizing award of the construction contract is included as Attachment A. A schematic drawing of the
River Avenue Transportation Improvements is included as Attachment B.
BACKGROUND
This project was initiated by City Council action on June 26, 2000, by adoption of the 2001 Capital
Budget and pursuant to Section 7.160(5) of the Eugene Code (EC), 1971.
This improvement project has been included in the adopted Metropolitan Transportation Plan first
adopted in 1986 and subsequently updated and adopted.
The Eugene Arterial and Collector Street Plan (AC SP) was adopted in1999 setting the classification,
standards and guidelines for streets within the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary. The standards outlined
in the ACSP for this street are the same as Lane County standards for an urban major collector, the
classification identified for River Avenue.
In July 2004, the Hearings Official, acting for City Council, held a hearing on the formation of the LID.
The hearing was continued to the City Council because remonstrances were received from owners of
property that would bear more than 50% of the proposed assessments.
In September 2004, the council considered annexation of the ten unincorporated properties subsequent
to the Lane County Board of Commissioners decision not to grant the City authority to include
unincorporated properties in the LID. The council voted against pursuing an island annexation.
In February 2005, the Lane County Board of Commissioners adopted a Board Order authorizing the City
to include unincorporated properties in the LID and be assessed per Eugene Code.
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050420\S050420B.doc
The City Council held a public hearing on April 11, 2005. The record was left open until 5 p.m. on
Tuesday, April 12 and three additional documents were received and are included as Attachment C.
After the hearing, the City Council requested responses to a number of questions and these are included
as Attachment D.
River Avenue is major collector located on the north side of Eugene, running parallel to and then
connecting to Beltline Road. River Avenue also connects to River Road, Division Avenue, and Beaver
Street, and is one of only three ways to cross Beltline Road between the Northwest Expressway and the
river. As a result of increased use, the existing roadbed is deteriorating and needs to be upgraded. In
addition, development in this general area and two connection points to the Ruth Bascom Riverbank
Trail System is creating a need to accommodate a variety of transportation users, including bicyclists,
bus riders, pedestrians, and motorists, for current and future needs. The land use is primarily
commercial, government (MWMC Water Pollution Control Facility, US Post Office and Veteran's
Clinic) and multi-family residential.
The process for design included notifications to and one-on-one meetings with affected properties about
many issues including survey work, right-of-way acquisition and design issues relating to acquisition,
trees, driveways, parking, utilities and sidewalks. A public open house was held in April 2004 at the
Water Pollution Control Facility on River Avenue. A public hearing was held in June 2004. Following
the Board of County Commissioners authorization in February 2005 to include unincorporated
properties in the LID, an informational letter was sent out. Open houses were held on April 5 and 7,
2005.
The project is designed in accordance with the adopted Eugene Arterial and Collector Street Plan
(ACSP). Parameters that guided design were the nature of existing development and consideration of
future development and redevelopment based on zoning, the right-of-way widths and costs of
acquisition for commercial properties, impacts to properties, utilities and trees. The standards for a
major collector street include sidewalk and bike lanes on both sides of the street, travel lanes, street
lights and street trees. The design has taken exception to three items in the ACSP: 1) the standard width
for sidewalks on commercial properties is 10 feet wide and the design includes a narrower width due to
the type of commercial development seen along River Avenue; 2) the standard setback sidewalks are
mixed with curbside sidewalks to minimize right-of-way acquisition, utility conflicts, tree removal and
impacts to private properties; and 3) an optional turn lane is included on the west end of the project due
to the close proximity and number of driveways and the volume of traffic.
Bids for the project were opened on July 7, 2004, with Babb Construction Co. (dba Delta Construction
Co. and dba Delta Concrete) as the apparent low bidder. The contractor has agreed to extend time for
consideration of the bid, keeping the 2004 contract prices, until May 2005.
The total project cost is estimated at $2,269,502.16, and is funded from several sources in the following
approximate amounts:
Assessments $1,067,627.86 (47%)
City of Eugene $1,201,874.31 (53%)
The City of Eugene funding includes primarily transportation and stormwater systems development
charge funds. A small portion of stormwater pipe maintenance is proposed with this contract and
stormwater utility funds would be used for that work.
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050420\S050420B.doc
If the resolution to form a LID is approved by the City Council, the improvement project is expected to
commence this construction season and property owners will not be assessed until after the completion
of the project, anticipated to be fall 2005. Following the levying of assessments, ten-year financing
through the City of Eugene will be available for owners of properties being assessed for this local
improvement.
All necessary steps have been completed as prescribed by the Eugene Code for the initiation and
formation of an LID.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
Improvement to River Avenue from 200 feet east of River Road to 100 feet west of Beltline Highway
addresses the City Council goal of Safe Community by improving street safety for the current and future
pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular needs along River Avenue.
OPTIONS
Per Section 7.166(3) of the Eugene Code, the City Council can take the following actions on April 20,
2005:
1. Adopt the resolution forming the LID
2. Substantially modify the improvements, re-bidding if necessary, and then conduct a hearing on the
modified improvements.
3. Delay the approval not more than 15 days.
4. Abandon the improvements.
CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends adoption of the minutes of the Hearings Official and adoption of the
resolution forming the Local Improvement District as described.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to adopt the Hearings Official minutes of June 28, 2004.
Move to adopt Resolution 4831 forming a Local Improvement District for paving and constructing
sidewalks, curbs, gutters, pedestrian medians, street lights, and stormwater drainage on River Avenue
from 200 feet east of River Road to 100 feet west of Beltline Highway.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Schematic Drawing of Improvements
C. Additional Testimony
D. Staff Responses to Questions by Council
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050420\S050420B.doc
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Michelle Cahill
Telephone: 682-6855
Staff E-Mail: michelle.r.cahill~ci, eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050420\S050420B.doc
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION FORMING A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR
PAVING, CONSTRUCTING CURBS AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS,
PEDESTRIAN MEDIANS, STREET LIGHTS, AND STORMWATER
DRAINAGE ON RIVER AVENUE FROM 200 FEET EAST OF RIVER
ROAD TO 100 FEET WEST OF BELTLINE HIGHWAY. (JOB #3693)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a
Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows:
Section 1. After proper notice of the hearings required by Sections 7.165 and 7.166 of the
Eugene Code, 1971 (EC), and after receiving the hearings officer's minutes, and conducting a public
hearing on April 11, 2005, the City Council hereby declares it is in the public interest to construct the
local improvements described in Section 2 of this Resolution and assess part of the costs thereof to
the specially benefited properties on River Avenue from 200 feet east of River Road to 100 feet west
of Beltline Highway, subject to the provisions of Section 4 of this Resolution.
Section 2. The Council hereby orders the establishment of a local improvement district on
River Avenue from 200 feet east of River Road to 100 feet west of Beltline Highway and in that
district to pave, construct or install curbs and gutters, sidewalks, pedestrian medians, street lights,
stormwater drainage and related improvements ("the Improvements').
Section 3. The costs of the Improvements shall be borne by and assessed to the properties in
the district in accordance with EC 7.175 and Section 4 of this Resolution. Included in the cost shall
be the overhead costs specified in EC 7.170 and whatever other special costs, such as acquisition of
interests in real property, are necessary to make the Improvements. Upon completion of the
Improvements, the final costs therefor will be calculated and the owners of benefitted property shall
be notified and the property assessed as provided in E.C. 7.185 to 7.240. The assessments to be
levied for the Improvements are hereby characterized for purposes of the property tax limitation in
Section 1 lb, Art. XI of the Oregon Constitution as assessments for a local improvement, not subject
to the constitutional limitation of $10 per thousand of real market value. Notice of the intent to so
characterize the assessments was sent to the affected property owners prior to the adoption of this
Resolution.
Section 4. Several of the properties proposed for inclusion in the local improvement district
are located outside the boundaries of the City. Under provisions of state law, the concurrence of the
Lane County Board of Commissioners is required for inclusion of the properties in the local
improvement district. On February 9, 2005, Lane County Board of Commissioners issued Board
Order 05-2-9-5, concurring that the following properties be included in the local improvement
district: Neely, Tax Lot #17041300 02900; Bimbo, Tax Lot #17041300 3000; Atkins, Tax Lot
#17041300 03200; Eugene Bible, Tax Lot #17041300 03400; Slocum, Tax Lots #17041300 3500
Resolution- 1
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050420\S050420B-attA. doc
(vacant property, future equivalent assessment), #17041300 03501, and #17041300 03502; Store N
Lock, Tax Lots #17041300 03600 and #17041300 03601; and Rucker, Tax Lot #17041322 00902.
On March 30, 2005, the Lane County Board of Commissioners reconsidered and made no changes to
Board Order 05-2-9-5.
Section 5. The City Council hereby declares that the construction of the Improvements, as
well as acquisition of rights-of-way or easements necessary for the construction, is for a public
purpose, is necessary for the public welfare, is authorized under the laws of the State of Oregon and
Charter and ordinances of the City of Eugene, and is directed by this Resolution.
Section 6. The City of Eugene, Oregon expects to make expenditures from its available
funds to pay for the costs of improvements to River Avenue from 200 feet east of River Road to
100 feet west of B eltline Highway (the "Project"). The City reasonably expects, and hereby
declares its intent, to issue bonds or other obligations (the "Reimbursement Bonds") and to use
the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures made from
the City's available funds for the Project. The City expects that the principal amount of the
Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed $1,174,440.15, which represents the estimated assessment
amount plus a margin of 10%.
Section 7. Lines of credit and other evidence of indebtedness authorized by City Council
Resolution No. 4807 may be issued to finance the construction of the Improvements.
Section 8. Proceeds from unbonded assessments, improvement bonds, foreclosure of liens
based on the Improvements and from other budgeted funds including ad valorem taxes, if levied, to
pay the debt shall be deposited in the Short Term Debt Fund until the indebtedness issued to finance
the Improvements is redeemed. Proceeds so deposited may be used only to pay the indebtedness
issued to finance the Improvements.
Section 9. The City Manager, or the person designated in writing by the City Manager to act
under Resolution No. 4807 may sign the evidence of indebtedness issued to finance the construction
of the Improvements.
Section 10. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.
The foregoing Resolution adopted the 20th day of April, 2005.
City Recorder
Resolution - 2
L:\CMO\2005 Council Agendas\M050420\S050420B-attA. doc
~O?O~ED l~ivE~: AVENUE Im?~:OVEmENT~ '~
From 400' ea~l; of Roee Lane 1;o eh& of proJect,
-. ............. range to ~elglin
~M~h 2005 A~e~ ~o Division Ave.
CAHILL Michelle R
From: ROSE Lynda L
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:44 PM
To: CAHILL Michelle R; SCHOENING Mark A
Subject: FW: Residents deserve more say over River Ave. improvement project
For the record...
..... Original Message .....
From: Becky Riley [mailto:briley@efn.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:46 PM
To: mayorandcc@ci.eugene.or.us
Subject: Residents deserve more say over River Ave. improvement project
April 12, 2005
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am hoping that the record is still held open to receive this
comment on the River Ave. Improvement project.
I am writing to you as a River Road resident and bicyclist who
appreciates your attention to the problems of River Avenue and the
work that has gone in to trying to address those problems. The road
is in terrible shape, and I feel that it is unsafe for pedestrians
and cyclists. I would like to see something done to improve the
situation, for the safety of all who travel along that road. I agree
that it is a priority situation that I would hope could be addressed
soon.
However, I am also sympathetic to the concerns of those who feel
current plans are "overkill", too costly, and perhaps not as well
thought out as they need to be to make sense over the long term
(especially relative to uncertain ODOT/Beltline plans for the
on-ramp, and connectivity to the still-dangerous, but evidently not
addressed, Beltline underpass and Willamette Greenway).
And I was dismayed to hear that street trees have evidently already
been cut down to make way for the project? I keep hoping that we can
find ways to avoid doing that - along the lines of the Wilsonville
model where an effort is made to spare every last mature tree -
recognizing their immense aesthetic and functional value to our
landscapes/streescapes.
My own opinion is that I don't want the project - or at least, those
parts truly needed for safety - to be needlessly delayed. However,
our community feels that it has not had adequate input to the plans,
and many people I've heard from are unhappy with the resulting
design. Many also want more information - about whether speed limits
will be increased on the road after improvements are made, etc. We
want to know that this will not turn in to another Maxwell or River
Road - the two most loathed streets in our neighborhood. Instead, we
hope it might have the potential for a more sensitive design that
minimizes pavement, maximizes trees and greenspace, and achieves
important public safety goals without unintentionally creating
massive paved areas and ugly landscapes with higher speed traffic
that while intended to be safer for pedestrians - instead become
pedestrian-repellant.
I hope you will vote against establishing a local improvement
district at this time, and will instead direct city staff to work
with a committee of local residents to take more public input and
!
CAHILL Michelle R
From: Rob Handy [handyrob@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 4:39 PM
To: mayorandcc@ci.eugene.or.us
Cc: Icbcccom@co.lane.or.us; dennis.m.taylor@ci.eugene.or.us; james.r.carlson@ci.eugene.or.us;
susan.l.muir@ci.eugene.or.us; kurt.m.yeiter@ci.eugene.or.us;
johnny.r.medlin@ci.eugene.or.us; michelle.r.cahill@ci.eugene.or.us;
lynda.l.rose@ci.eugene.or.us; beth.l.forrest@ci.eugene.or.us; finiganm@comcast.net
Subject: River Road Advisory: River Ave. LID
To: Mayor Piercy and Eugene City Councilors
Re: River Road Community Organization Board Advisory on River Ave. Local
Improvement District(LID).
We have reviewed the LID proposal. We are concerned about the lack of public
process and also the design details of this project. We urge you to vote
against authorization of the LID at this time.
This is a sentinel project in River Road. It's important for the River Road
community to have more input before the project moves forward. This project
presents an opportunity to build trust between the City and our
neighborhood. The current design needs more significant refinement. River
Road wants to contribute design input that reflects the heritage values of
our neighborhoods.
River Avenue needs a context-sensitive design process, with significant
neighborhood involvement, much like was used for the Irvington Road
project.
Thank you,
Rob Handy, Chair
on behalf of the board of the River Road Community Organization
cc: LCBC
City Manager Dennis Taylor
Jim Carlson
Susan Muir
Kurt Yeiter
Johnny Medlin
Michelle Cahill
Lynda Rose
Santa Clara Community Organization
CAHILL Michelle R
From: ROSE Lynda L
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 5:12 PM
To: CAHILL Michelle R
Subject: FW: River Ave. Project
Here's another.
..... Original Message .....
From: Janell cobarrubias [mailto:jancobo@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 4:21 PM
To: mayorandcc@ci.eugene.or.us
Cc: eugenepso@ci.eugene.or.us
Subject: River Ave. Project
City Council Members,
We are writing in regards to the River Avenue project. This project, with
having the estimated cost over $2,000,000. is absolutely too elaborate and
certainly not cost effective. Having some improvements made to River Ave.
are not out of line, but having sidewalks where it is almost all commercial
is not needed at all and can not be said for the purpose of public safety.
Having curbs, gutters, re-paving and possibly bike lanes are within the
reasonable limits. However, having 25% of the costs of the project being
engineering is absurd. The city has done much of the engineering already and
even if that wasn't a consideration, 25% of the costs for engineering is
ridiculous.
Finally, this project needs to be scaled down to be reasonable and with a
fiscal responsibility and conscience.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration to the public's
concerns.
Sincerely,
Mike & Janell Cobarrubias
River Ave. property owners
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onmOO200636ave/direct/O1/
P
ublic Works
Engineering
City of Eugene
244 East Broadway
MEMORANDUM Eugene, Oregon 97401
(541) 682-5560
(541) 682-8410 FAX
www.ci.eugene.or, us/pw/engineering
Date: April 13, 2005
To: Mayor Piercy and City Council
From: Michelle Cahill 682-6855
Principal Civil Engineer, Public Works - Engineering
Subject: Response to Councilors - River Avenue Transportation Improvements
Job #3693
At the April 11, 2005 public hearing City Councilors asked numerous questions and requested that
specific information be brought back to the April 20, 2005 meeting to consider the formation of a Local
Improvement District for Transportation Improvements on River Avenue. Responses to these questions
follow and are group by theme.
REDUCING COSTS
The first three questions relate to deleting elements of the improvements to reduce costs. Based on the
Eugene Code, the assessable portion of the project is for the following elements - paving for the travel
lanes, curb and gutter and sidewalks. In order to reduce property owner assessments while abiding by the
current assessment policy, some combination of (1) reducing curb-to-curb width to something less than
20' since commercial properties are assessed for 10' of pavement; (2) eliminating curb and gutter; and/or
(3) eliminating sidewalks would be required. All of the other costs are borne by the City so eliminating
turning lanes, bike lanes, trees, street lights, pedestrian medians, and stormwater repair work would only
reduce the City's cost.
Costs are distributed to various categories, some directly, like the cost of asphalt to paving, and some
prorated across many categories (like engineering distributed proportionately across 8 categories of
improvements). The following estimates are based on previously calculated per square foot costs. This
cost will change some with a different proration of some costs (i.e. more engineering will be picked up by
property owners if most of the SDC funded categories are eliminated). The magnitude of the estimate is
approximate and may be helpful.
1. What is the cost of the bike lanes?
Using the low bid, expenses to date and estimated future costs the price per square foot of paving for the
proposed design is approximately $10 per square foot. The 5' wide bike lanes on both sides of the street
equal 41,250 square feet of paving so SDC funds allocated for the project could be reduced approximately
$412,500. However, bike lanes on streets classified as major collectors are required by the Oregon
Transportation Planning Rule.
Page 1 of 1
2. What is the cost of the center turn lane?
The area of the center mm lane is approximately 24,000 square feet. The estimated paving costs are $10
per square foot. Eliminating the center mm lane would result in a reduction of $240,000 in SDC funds
allocated to the project. Without a center mm lane there would not be space for the pedestrian medians
that protect individuals crossing the street in three distinct locations.
3. What is the cost of one sidewalk on one side of the street?
The north side sidewalk totals approximately 23,568 square feet and the estimated cost is $5.30 per square
foot for a total reduction in costs of approximately $125,000. Driveway aprons would still be constructed
and assessed.
DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS
The project estimate of $2.27 million is distributed 47% to assessments and 53% primarily to SDCs. The
questions regarding the distribution of costs follow.
4. Why isn't ODOT being assessed since their right of way abuts the project?
The improvements stop short of ODOT right of way. By Eugene Code property owners that have frontage
along an improvement receive a special benefit and pay a share of the cost for the improvement. No
improvements are planned for the section within the ODOT right of way, and no special benefit is
bestowed on the property so no cost sharing is anticipated. Stopping the improvements short of the
interchange allows space for potential future modifications of the interchange.
5. Is MWMC or the City being assessed for the Water Pollution Control Facility property?
MWMC will be assessed for the improvements based on the frontage along River Avenue of the Water
Pollution Control Facility (WPCF). The funding for the assessment is in the proposed MWMC budget for
FY 06. The WPCF property has approximately 3200 feet of frontage along River Avenue and the
MWMC has anticipated the assessment for these improvements for a number of years. The estimated
assessment to be paid by MWMC is approximately $397,000.
6. Who would pay if there was only one sidewalk?
Eugene Code requires property abutting the sidewalk to pay a proportionate amount of the cost of the
sidewalk based on the frontage of the property. Per Eugene Code, if the Council determines topography
makes it unfeasible to construct sidewalks on both sides of the street the costs for a sidewalk on one side
can be distributed to properties on both sides.
7. Why are stormwater utility fees being used to fund the project?
There is approximately 124 feet of existing storm pipe that is in poor condition and it will be removed and
replaced with this street project. This is maintenance work so this is an appropriate use of utility fee
funds. The current budget allocates approximately $25,000 of the $1.2 million city share to come from
the stormwater utility fund.
8. Does the federal government pay for the post office assessment?
Local authority to levy assessments does not obligate the federal government to pay assessments or
systems development charges. In lieu of paying the street assessment the post office constructed curb,
gutter, sidewalk and some additional pavement in front of the River Avenue facility when the post office
was built. The costs distributed to the property the post office is located on are reduced to account for
prior construction of improvements to city standards and will be covered by the SDC fund.
Page 2 of 2
9. Provide an accounting of the 23% engineering and 5% administrative costs.
The 23% engineering cost is an estimate of the cost for Public Works Engineering staff to implement the
project. The assessed amount will be 23% of the primary construction contract or actual costs whichever
is less. The fee includes direct and overhead costs to implement the project from the early stages of
scoping the project after a capital budget is authorized to the final assessment calculations and drawings
of as-built plans. The fee is prorated across all types of improvements, those assessed and those paid for
by City funds. The following table highlights some of the types of work and expenses to date.
Preliminary planning and public outreach Includes assessment calculation $ 36,000
and coordination
Design Includes utility coordination, $166,000
design, design research, legal
description research & writing
Survey* Topographical and construction $ 48,500
Inspection and construction management* Inspection, as-construct, pay $ 32,000
calculations, contract admin
Final Assessment* Calculations, hearings, outreach $ 10,000
Right of Way acquisition coordination Property research, appraisals and $112,200
negotiations for 12 acquisitions
*not completed, cost includes estimate to complete ESTIMATED TOTAL $404,700
The 5% administrative cost covers the services provided by the Finance Division of Central Services prior
to the payment or financing of an assessment. The major component of the work is customer service,
primarily conversations with customers regarding financial options. Other elements include reviewing
low-to-moderate income subsidy applications for transportation projects, mailing the assessment hearing
notice to property owners by certified mail and long term debt applications, initial account set-ups, and
maintenance of assessment tracking computer software.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
10. Provide a staff evaluation of Mark Reed's off-street bike path proposal.
Mark Reed suggested a separate off-street path be built instead of on-street bike lanes. The Oregon
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan does not recommend multi-use paths next to roadways because half of the
bicycle traffic will ride against the normal flow of motor vehicle traffic, which is contrary to the rules of
the road. The following are some consequences than can result from off-street paths next to roadways
identified by the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and the Pedestrian and Bicycling Information
Center:
· When the path ends, bicyclists riding against traffic tend to continue to travel on the wrong side of
the street, as do bicyclists getting to a path. Wrong-way travel by bicyclists is a major cause of
bicycle/automobile crashes.
· At intersections and driveways, motorists crossing the path often do not notice bicyclists coming
from certain directions.
· Cyclists using the path against the flow of traffic often cannot see the signs posted for traffic
using the roadway without stopping and turning around.
Page 3 of 3
· Bicyclists on the path are required to stop or yield at cross-streets and driveways.
· Stopped motor vehicle traffic on a cross-street or driveway may block the path.
· Some bicyclists will use the roadway instead of the bicycle path because they have found the
roadway to be safer, more convenient, or better maintained.
· Bicyclists using the roadway are often subjected to harassment by motorists who feel that in all
cases bicyclists should be on the path instead.
· Bicyclists may also prefer the road because they will have priority over cross traffic because they
have the same right of way as motorists.
Additionally, motorized scooters will be able to use the bike lanes on River Avenue but they would not be
able to use the off-street path. Motorized scooters can not be legally used on River Avenue at present.
11. Why was on-street parking removed?
Without curb and gutter there is not formal on-street parking on the existing street. Some property
owners have paved parking adjacent to the street. Parking is not included in the project because it is a
direct assessment to the abutting property and property owners didn't want the additional cost. One
exception is parking on the east end of River Avenue on the south side of the street. In response to public
input, the design included parking for users of the Ruth Bascom River Trail. The cost of this parking area
is not being assessed to the abutting property owner.
12. Why is traffic calming not part of the project?
Traffic calming is part of the project. The relatively narrow travel lanes, pedestrian medians, street trees,
striping for bike lanes and sidewalks are elements of street design that encourage slower traffic.
The travel lanes were specifically designed to be narrow to encourage traffic to slow down. Major
Collector streets may have travel lanes as narrow as 10' but the higher volume of general traffic and the
high level of truck traffic were factors considered when designing 11-foot travel lanes on the east end
where there is also a 12-foot center turn lane and the 12-foot travel lane where there is not a center turn
lane.
13. Will underpass of Beltline still exist if ODOT closes the access to Beltline?
The Oregon Highway Plan requires local connectivity goals be met and it is anticipated that ODOT will
comply with local requirements and plans that identify this as a vital connection. River Avenue is one of
only three connections between the Willamette River and Northwest Expressway to cross the Beltline
Highway and connect the River Road area with the Santa Clara area. It is a high priority to maintain and
improve that connectivity.
CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
14. How much would night-time construction add to the cost of the project?
Staff did not include night-time construction in the project primarily because of the apartment complex at
150 River Avenue with approximately 167 units and other residential units.
The contractor is willing to use night time construction as one tool to meet the request of minimizing
impact to commercial properties from construction. Other tools include working closely with property
owners and adjusting the schedules of individual work items to meet the needs of individual property
owners. The contractor has suggested that excavation, pipe work and rock work be done at night because
Page 4 of 4
that has the largest spatial impact. The contractor is working on an estimate that would include the cost of
keeping the plant and offices open, keeping staff such as mechanics available, having lights to support
plant, dumping and construction site work lit.
CONSTRUCTION BIDS
The competitive bid process last summer resulted in a very favorable bid available. Since petroleum
prices (i.e., asphalt for pavement and diesel for running construction equipment) have increased
substantially since last summer, redesigning and rebidding would provide a good likelihood of getting a
higher bid and doing less work for more money.
If you have any questions please call me at 682-6855 or by e-mail
michelle, r. cahill~ci, eugene, or. us.
Page 5 of 5