Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/17/1978 Meeting ,- '\ " - M I N U T1'E S SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Apri 1 17, L978 Special meehng of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon was called to order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller on April 17, 1978, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber with the following Councilors present: D. W. Hamel, Ray Bradley, Eric Haws, Jack Delay, Scott Lieuallen, C1nd Betty Smith. Councilors Tom Williams and Brian Obie were absent. e I. Public Hearing A. Proposed T-2000 Plan Assistant City Manager distributed to Council a plan adoption process for the City of Eugene which outlined the various dates for Couneil consideration of the T-2000 Plan (copy attached). This process plan had been developed by the Metropolitan Area Transportation Committee (MATC) who has been charged with developing the plan for L-COG and is the primary policy committee for the T-2000 Plan. He reviewed the various dates for ~ouncil noting the joint meeting tentatively scheduled for May 25 would be to identify issues. Then each juriSdictional body would discuss those issues and return for a final delibera- tion with formal adoption to occur tentatively on June 15. If there are major differences, MATC wi 11 have to develop a compromi se pl an to be revi ewed by each jurisdiction. It is hoped that the entirl~ plan can be adopted by the June 29 deadline. Assistant Manager noted the time constraints related to having the plan adopted by July 1 in order to ensure financing of LTD. If the plan is not adopted by that date, there is a possibil"ity that Federal funding for LTD would be lost. He noted that James Bernhard, President of the Planning Commission, and Jim Farah, planner, were available to answer questions. Public hearing was opened. ' Jon Silvermoon, 47-1/2 West 25th, represented Friendly Area Neighbors. Their recommendations were directed toward the portion of the plan that affects their particular neighborhood. They recoqnized the extensive efforts that had gone into development of the plan. They I"eaffirmed their positions of endorse- ment of various portions of the plan, including the modal split of 30 percent transit, 15 percent bicycle, and 10 percent pedestrian; and the concept of balanced land use wherein places of empl~'ment and residence would be more closely integrated. There were five concerns regarding the T-2000 Plan. First, the cost for streets and highway projects is nearly $130 million and it is their concern that this price tag would literally tax the people of Eugene beyond, what at times seems to be, an intolerable point. They urged adoption of the transpor- tation plan in a form which the City can I clfford, not one which will place a financial burden on the residents~ A second concern was that the bicycle and pedestri an el ements were not adequately developed. It was fel t the update of the Bikeway Master Plan was needed and, in addition, a pedestrian plan should be e 4117/78--1 2.Sq ... developed which would include more than just a series of sidewalks. A third concern regarded the proposed bus rapid-transit system with two changes sug- gested: A more direct route needed from the Friendly area neighborhood to the University of Oregon; additionally, they wanted to see the BART line from 29th ~ and Willamette to 18th and Polk realigned to 29th-28th, Friendly-24th, Chambers.- ~ 18th. Another concern expressed was opposition to the proposed 18th-19th couplet. It was felt that this would increase traffic flow and congestion in front of South Eugene High School and 19th was considered to be a major bicycle route with this couplet interferring with its use in that manner. The final concern was the opposition to the Eugene east-west corridor recommendation. Specifically the group objected to the 6th-7th Freeway and the West 8th Avenue intersections project. The group proposed that 6th and 7th be treated in the manner outlined in the unrecommended Alternative No.2 of widening each to four lanes and constructing an arterial connecting them to West 11th. For 18th Avenue the group proposed intersection improvements at Chambers, Polk, and Willamette only. Mr. Silvermoon concluded that the neighborhood group felt each neighborhood should be consulted during the design 'and implementation process for any project recommended during the adopted plan. F. A. Sparrow, 1568 West 24th Place, spoke in regard to treatment of citizens. He said the City had been harrassing him for quite some time, telling him he would be fined $500 a day for feeding sea gulls. He said he planned to sue the City and felt there would not be enough money left for the T-2000 Plan after his lawsuit. Jon Stafford, 1060 Madison, represented the West Side Neighborhood Quality Project. He spoke regarding the Washington-Jefferson street corridor, express- ing dissatisfaction with the increase in traffic into the local neighborhood. He felt the initial planning and zoning of the area of establishing a corridor between the residential and commerical areas was a good idea; however, it is now a ~ corridor between residential and residential areas. He said his group had been trying to rectify that for a number of years and had been hoping in the T-2000 Update that could be changed. However, it has not happened. One point he wished to make clear was the indication in the plan of an incentive to be used to direct the Ferry Street Bridge-Coburg Road traffic to the Washington-Jefferson Street Bridge. His group was very much in opposition to that particular part of the plan and felt it would make an already bad situation worse. He felt the plan should delete that suggestion or add the wording "after measures have been completed to return the Washington-Jefferson Street Bridge traffic to residential status." Suggestions such as keeping parking on Washington-Jefferson street, widening 6th-7th avenues, and closure of Madison at 6th Avenue do not seem to provide much relief to the Washington-Jefferson street problem. It was asked that the plan delete those proposals and establish for the interim diver- sion of some traffic to Lincoln and Charnel ton, and implementation of traffic control techniques to provide such diversion. The main concern was to get traffic off Washington-Jefferson streets. Jim Williams, 2083 Garfield, spoke regarding the issue of traffic on Washington- Jefferson streets. He said most traffic off those streets are going west; and an alternate program that would take the traffic more east than west mi~ht be 4/17/78--2 . 2.~O - e - a viable alternative. He emphasized the point that the rating on Alterna- tive No.2 for the Downtown Westside Alternative was established as a minor negative social impact. He felt it to be a very major impact. Also, he spoke regarding saving the WOW Hall, noting it would be necessary to move it if the east/west corridor were built. He felt Council should make some positive, definitive statement in the plan to guarantee saving the WOW Hall or it would lead to its closure. He said the west side corridor may never be constructed, another reason to save the Hall. He noted there was a very viable effective program in the WOW Hall that is very important to the downtown community and to the neighborhood communities. All 35 arts organizations have passed a resolu- tion asking for saving of the WOW Hall as the facilities are going to be needed in the future for budding young artists. He noted there was a very expensive dance floor, that it is an important historic landmark in the area, and it is felt that this valuable building needs to be preserved by a definitive statement in the plan. Roy Nelson, 1125 Lorane Highway, represented Mrs. Ann Ramp, Crest Drive Neighbor- hood Association. He requested Council consider deleting Lorane Highway as an arterial from Washington to Chambers Street, as the Crest Drive Association and all 87 property owners between Washington and Chambers are opposed to money spent for this project. He noted in 1968 the Lorane Highway was projected as a future arterial followed by significant things happening since that time. He said arterial streets had been created using ex-County streets, i.e., Chambers and West 28th. The result of that had been to reduce the traffic on Lorane Highway about 50 percent from what it was in 1968. He said the Lorane Highway area had been saturated with building and felt there would not be any more increased housing density. So he asked what was the reason for making Lorane Highway between Washington and Chambers into a fully declared arterial. He said the Lorane Highway is no longer an arterial or a designated traffic route, but simply a fully developed residential street. He felt there was no reason to make the property owners pay to make it into an arterial. Richard Hansen, 2744 Tomahawk Lane, expressed his major concern regarding past history indicating that when something is put into print it is hard to get that changed. He felt that Council should be very careful to review the plan before its adoption. He said the expectation of a 15 percent pUblic- transportation level was foolhardy, noting the community is not developed in any central area. Rather, it is spread out which will compound the problem of trying to get people to use mass transit. He cautioned Council in its haste to adopt the plan by July 1, and asked that they review the plan very carefully before adopting. He urged Council to look carefully at the goal of 15 percent for mass transit, and, if that is unobtainable, then re-evaluate whether it is really an obtainable goal. If the plaa, is adopted, he felt the~e would be problems re: Goodpasture Island area. It has been designated as a multiple-residential use area, and there would be a very high-density residential use of the area creating traffic problems. He noted that it already has an access problem, and suggested the need for some access to the River Road Belt Line area, such as a bridge between Valley River Center and K-Mart, tying into the River Road area. Richard Roels, 833 Lawrence, No.3, expressed concern regarding the Lincoln- Charnel ton couplet on the west side. He felt it not desirable to have major arterial traffic between the residential neighborhoods. He said when the 4/17/78--3 z" southbound traffic reaches 13th, he thought it would continue on south when it reaches Charnelton and the reverse would be true for northbound traffic. Regarding the high-residential density in the downtown Westside area, he said ~ if that is a desirable goal of the City this couplet seems against that goal .., because it would place another road block to those who choose to live close to their places of employment. A possible solution would be to have Jefferson- Washington street traffic go to 13th or to Willamette Street south or to use the Southern Pacific Roadway. He noted another particular point the design needed to address was the fact that major arterial traffic problems are generated during the commuter hours. He felt the easiest solution would be to get those people out faster. He also expressed concern about the high-density parking on Broadway and Charnel ton. He noted he was also in favor of preservation of the WOW Hall. Jon Spangler, 2159 Elysium, felt the T-2000 Plan and its technical reports are excellent pieces of work with one minor drawback in that it assumes the status quo regarding transportation. He suggested the Council pursue acceptance of alternative modes of transportation such as use of bicycles. He felt another problem of the plan was that it did not deal adequately with the concern of the present carrying capacity of the metropolitan area. He said it has never been determined how many people can live well in the Eugene-Springfield area. Until that is determined, he felt it unwise to spend millions of dollars on automobile transporation plans. He felt importance given to the automobile traffic should be placed on the back burner and alternatives should be considered in more depth. He said if the plan had to be adopted, then he suggested a review stage in which an area-wide brainstorming session would be held to consider alterna- tives and get away from the status quo in all areas. He agreed with the T-2000 Plan for the most part, but would like to see more emphasis on bicycles and alternatives. He felt this plan to be a good beginning point. ~ Public hearing was closed, there 'being no further testimony. James Bernhard, Chairman of the Planning Commission, said the Commission had studied the plan for about the last three months. He noted there had been several public hearings and work sessions on recommendations. Ms. Smith requested Mr. Bernhard to comment on any of the suggestions made at this public hearing, i.e., saving the WOW Hall or comments about the Lorane Highway. Mr. Bernhard said the Commission did not take any specific action on individual noncorridor items, such as Lorane Highway. He said tne Commission would suggest each one be looked at very carefully before taking any action. Mr. Lieuallen requested staff review the alternatives that have been recommended and respond to Council as to whether they would work; if they would not work, why not. For example, some kind of interim policy for the 6th-7th, Washington- Jefferson street area, and justification for the Lorane Highway becoming an arteri al. Assistant Manager said in preliminary discussions with the State Department of Transportation, they are proceeding to apply the Community Meet proposal on a computer model. He said it would be six to eight weeks before that - 4/17/78--4 ~'2.. - - - information would be available. Staff hopes that during Wednesday work session, Council would identify for staff the specific areas and issues that it would like to be addressed by staff. Those issues would then be researched and brought back to Council before it meets with the other jurisdictions. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and passed, the meeting was adjourned. ~ A. 'Kei th Marti n Assistant City Manager AKM:DT:jm/CM25a1 4/17/78--5 2'3 April 17 ~ 1978 T-2000 PLAN ADOPTION PROCESS FOR CITY OF EUGENE June 15 (Tentative) JOINT SESSION FOR ADOPTION OF PLAN June 16 - 23 June 23 - 28 MATC resolution of di fferences Adoption of plan by each agency June 29 (Tentative) RATIFICATION BY LCOG BOARD 2.'Lf Springfield City Counci 1 t " - Lane County Commission J, Joint Meeting of three legislative bodies I I - -, , ~.' C La~e- 1 I County I 1 ~.~ J ~ ....... ....... ....... ~l- - MATC - )- - - - - I I ~ _ _\Jt _ _ _ Eugene I ISpringfieldl City I 1 City I Counci 1 I I Counci 1 ( , w I ~ I L. c. o. G. Board &