Laserfiche WebLink
<br />presentation and a question and answer session, time permitting. In total, about 175 people <br />participated in the stakeholder meetings. <br /> <br />City staff hosted an open house on April 26, 2016, at the Eugene City Library. An estimated 80 <br />people were at the community meeting, where they discussed the proposal. Six City staff were <br />present to answer questions and receive comments, both for and against the RRQZ. More than a <br />dozen displays and maps filled the room, providing details <br />recommendation and other technical information about the project. The forum also provided a <br />space for citizens to debate and share with each other their stance on the proposal. Attendees were <br />asked to indicate approximately where they lived, using colored dots on a large city map. Not <br />surprisingly, the greatest number of attendees (15) indicated the Whiteaker neighborhood, <br />followed by downtown (7), Friendly area, Santa Clara and Southeast neighbors (3 each) and the rest <br />from various places around the city. <br /> <br />The largest amount of feedback came in the form of a comment form and survey, provided at the <br />public meetings and online. The online survey was available for more than two months. A majority <br />Note:³§¤ <br />of the 231 respondents expressed their views on the proposal through the online survey. <br />®­«¨­¤ ²´±µ¤¸ ¬¤³§®£®«®¦¸ ¶ ² ­®³ ²¢¨¤­³¨¥¨¢  ­£ ³§¤  ´³§¤­³¨¢¨³¸ ®¥ ³§®²¤ ±¤²¯®­£¨­¦ ¢ ­­®³ ¡¤ <br />µ¤±¨¥¨¤£ȁ <br /> <br />3´¬¬ ±¸ ®¥ &¤¤£¡ ¢ª <br />While statistically valid conclusions cannot be drawn from the 475 or so comments gathered at <br />meetings, in the form of letters and emails to staff, and through the survey form over the past <br />several months, it is apparent that the community is split over the need, value, cost and impact of <br />the proposed railroad quiet zone project. It is notable that very few people do not have an opinion <br />on this topic. <br /> <br />The most frequent comments were about quality of life and cost (both the estimated amount and <br />the priorities for City funding). Other common themes: affordable housing, safety, and choices <br />people make to locate near the tracks. A more detailed analysis of survey responses and comments <br />is provided in Appendix D. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 14 <br /> <br /> <br />