01242000 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regular Meeting January 24, 2000 that signs could possibly be placed to restrict parking. would look into this matter. Page 978' He stated Staff Mayor Moore introduced a discussion regarding a proposal of IH35 overpass connecting Riverside Drive and River Road. Mr. Gilley stated the August 25, 1998 letter in the Council packet had accurate costs for the project in the amount of $9.3 million. He stated the timing issue was becoming urgent. He stated the project would be difficult to extend through parkland. Mr. Cox stated the project would have an impact on certain neighborhoods and the Bond Committee had expressed a need for connectivity. John McBride stated the City needs to make a decision. He stated a lot of development has occurred in the River Road area, and there are not enough accesses from the east to the west. He stated no one is interested in delaying TXDOT's project and is in hopes there will be a loop around the City and that River Road will be extended. He stated there needs to be a conscious review of this situation. Ms. Hughson stated this would be good to have but does not know if it will help to the extent to justify the $9.3 million expenditure. Mr. Cox asked if C. M. Allen Parkway had been ruled out for an overpass, and Mr. Gilley stated nothing had been ruled out. Mr. Gilley stated no studies have been done regarding C. M. Allen but early on the infrastructure was viewed as being a problem if we pursued an overpass at C. M. Allen. Mr. Mihalkanin stated he is in favor of this project because the City needs to look at a better traffic flow and thinks this cost will be of benefit to the City. Mr. Doiron stated he is in agreement with Mr. Mihalkanin and the only better way would be to have the overpass at C. M. Allen. Mr. Cox stated he thinks Mr. Mihalkanin's points are correct and is also interested in exploring Ms. Hughson's Riverside Drive alternative and wants the matter agendized for February 14. Mr. Gilley stated the TXDOT bid is to let in early 2000. If the City advises them we want to pursue the overpass option, they will delay this project, so the decision needs to be made quickly. Mr. Mihalkanin requested bond language be provided at the February 14 meeting in case the Council decides to place this on the May ballot. Mr. Hernandez stated the overpass may impact the new Tourist Center and the greenhouse interpretive building. He stated the Council needs to be cautious how this area will be impacted. Mr. Mihalkanin stated he supports Mr. Hernandez' comments and wants Staff to communicate with the neighborhood prior to the February 14 meeting. Mayor Moore introduced a discussion regarding San Antonio Street parking. Mr. Gilley stated concerns were expressed from the affected business owners in the area. He stated a trial period had been established and has now ended and reverted back to two-hour parking. Some businesses expressed concern they were not notified of the change in parking hours. Through newsletters and direct mailing, the businesses were actually invited to participate. The Parking Committee is actually doing an evaluation now and will get comments from the businesses and plan to complete that process by the end of February. Mr. Mihalkanin stated you cannot make people participate and is sure there was no intent to exclude anyone. Kyle Maysel stated the Parking Committee is now doing a survey of the businesses affected and will have their recommendation by late February or early March. He does not think there are broad-based complaints from the downtown businesses. Mayor Moore introduced a discussion regarding Downtown Improvements Bonds in the amount of $1.3-$1.5 million. Mr. Gilley advised the Council information was provided in the Council's packets regarding what could be included in these improvements and what the costs would be. Mr. Mihalkanin stated the Main Street Advisory Board and the CVB passed Resolutions in support of this and the Downtown Association would be meeting tomorrow night regarding this issue. Mr. Moseley stated he supports this as a bond issue. Mr. Cox asked how long the City would be paying on such bonds, and Mr. Gilley stated twenty years. Mr. Cox stated he sees merit in this proposal but is concerned with inching up on the property tax when there are CDBG funds that could be used instead of bonds. Mr. Doiron asked if there were any alternative funding sources,