03/17/1986 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e e e John C. Neely, Jr., 1600 Horn Lane, read his testimony and then submitted it in writing. He said the Urban Facilities Plan attempts to control where growth occurs. He said many documents indicate that cost-effective and environmentally protective sewage collection and treatment are critical for establishing where growth will occur. Mr. N~elY discussed the construction of the sewage treatment plant and studies by CH M Hill and Brown and Caldwell. He said house taps to the River Road-Santa Clara interceptor sewers are breaking loose, and that problem must be corrected before any growth can occur in those areas. He said River Road-Santa Clara property owners anticipated the problems and cooperated in passing House Bill 2521 which provides for the incorporation of a new city which can provide for growth. Melina Neal, 388 Goodpasture Island Road #31, said the Hult Center CIP projects are not necessary. She has been in local theater activities for 25 years and would like to continue to direct and produce theatrical productions in Eugene. She said not enough emphasis was put on functional aspects of the Hult Center and too much emphasis was put on architectural design. She said the Soreng Theater does not work well for local productions and is too expensive for people like her who do not get grants. Ms. Neal said she participated in the LCAA to build an auditorium, but it did not result in a theater she can use. She said the City is now supporting the Hult Center. She resents the support because she cannot afford to produce shows there. She said the Hult Center has made it very difficult for people like her to produce shows in Eugene because it is hard to get publicity if shows are not in the Hult Center. She said the Hult Center is a beautiful building and the City has provided enough for the people who can afford to go there. Jon Silvermoon, 2441 Madison, discussed the format of the CIP. He said it is difficult to compare projects in this CIP with projects in former CIPs and the TransPlan because some project names and the scope of some projects were changed without explanation. He suggested future CIPs have an appendix that indicates what happened to the first year projects in the previous CIP. He said some Parks Department projects in last year's CIP were identified as appropriate for funding with bonds, but this year's CIP does not identify bonds as a funding source. Mr. Silvermoon said all the short- and medium-range projects in the TransPlan were listed in the ten-year CIP, but only about 20 percent of the bike projects in the TransPlan were listed in the ten-year CIP. He said $585,000 was identified for bike path rehabilitation in last year's CIP, but this yearls CIP identified only $160,000 for bike path rehabilitation and none of it was included in the first three years. In contrast, street and alley rehabilitation funds in this year's CIP were double those in last year's CIP. He said the listings raise serious questions about the City's commitment to alternative modes of transportation. MINUTES--Eugene City Council March 17, 1986 Page 4