Laserfiche WebLink
Mary O'Brien, 3525 Gilham Road, asked, regarding information on the MOU for the WEP, what <br />"facilitate delivery of a new city street" meant. She noted that County Public Works Director Ollie <br />Snowden had asked who would pay for the cost of this new city street if the $17.7 million approved by the <br />State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) did not cover its total cost. She related that he also <br />wondered which agency would be responsible for constructing the separated connection of the WEP to <br />Highway 99. She recommended getting the answers to these questions and holding a public hearing prior to <br />signing an MOU. She said, should a new city street be needed for the WEP project, the whole process <br />should be opened to alternative street approaches, but to date, these approaches had been kept off the table <br />as it had been presented to the voting public as a state highway. She thought the City, should it enter into <br />the MOU, could be forced to pay for part of the construction and maintenance of the project. <br /> <br />Gordon Howard, 425 River Avenue, was present to speak to the council on what he considered to be <br />unethical behavior regarding the formation of a local improvement district (LID) to improve River Avenue. <br />He related that City staff had asked the Hearings Official, Milo Mecham, not to send his report to the City <br />Council. He thought this was due to staff having received signed remonstrance forms from 31 of the 33 land <br />owners that would be affected by assessments for street improvements. He thought that staff was <br />withholding the Hearings Official report and other information. He opined this was unethical behavior. He <br />likened the proposed annexation to an "end run" around the will of the people. <br /> <br />James Reed, 990 Crest Drive, spoke on behalf of a large group of people in his neighborhood concerned <br />with and opposed to the designation of Crest Drive as a collector street. He asserted the plan could just as <br />easily be executed with local street designations. He said staff had yet to answer most of the questions asked <br />at the neighborhood meeting with City staff and elected officials. He asked the council to consider the merits <br />of the anonymous web-based comment form and weigh the comments against the active public comment that <br />has gone on throughout this issue. He also asked staff to provide the agenda for the next neighborhood <br />meeting at least a week prior to the meeting date. He recognized, on a positive note, that City staff had met <br />with neighborhood representatives on street designs and pedestrian amenities that were in accordance with <br />what neighbors believed would be acceptable. He conveyed the neighborhood's desire for some level of <br />commitment on these ideas. <br /> <br />Kevin Matthews, 120 West Broadway, president of Friends of Eugene, called the alleged shift of the WEP <br />from a State highway to a city street a "fundamental change." He asked why this conversion was suggested <br />to occur. He asserted that "shuffling" a project from one jurisdiction to another without any public input <br />would not solve transportation issues in West Eugene. He predicted that the project would not come to <br />fruition because of fundamental federal, State, and local problems with it. He recommended asking <br />questions first and signing the MOU when the time was appropriate. <br /> <br />Phillip Farrington, 1160 Monroe Street, vice president of the Oregon chapter of the American Planning <br />Association, spoke in support of the resolution to oppose Ballot Measure 37. He said just compensation <br />laws were already on the books for the regulatory taking of property. He predicted that the passing of the <br />Ballot Measure would present an exorbitant cost to the State of Oregon and local jurisdictions and would <br />cause irreparable harm to planning and land use. <br /> <br />Chuck Meeker, 309 River Avenue, owner of Clemens Marina, conveyed the opposition of the property <br />owners on River Avenue to the proposed street improvements. He explained that they were not opposed to <br />street improvements per se, but could not afford the assessments, projected to be more than $1 million. He <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 13, 2004 Page 2 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />