10/10/1983 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Ball said he would support the motion as stated and commented that e Sacred Heart must be forced, if necessary, to address the needs of its employees. Ms. Schue said she wished to see the program begin and that she would compromise on the length of the delay. She said she would support the motion as stated. Mr. Lindberg reminded the council that it had already accepted the Federal grant, but it had not accepted this specific manifestation of a parking program. Councilor Hansen questioned why the program was being delayed if the decision to implement it had already been made. He said the same concerns would still exist after 30 days. Mr. Ball responded that he would not support proceed- ing with the program without the 3D-day delay. He said that a tremendous amount of information had recently been discussed between the involved groups. He said the 3D-day delay was to include those individuals who had not provided input into the project. Councilor Obie said he would not support the motion, explaining that he was not convinced that the plan was the best solution to the problem. Mayor Keller restated the motion. He stressed that some figures existed that might be important in making a decision on the program. He said it was not the City's responsibility to provide free parking to University students. He said that he advocated people being allowed to park their cars on the street in front of their residences when they wished, but he realized that council had histori- cally not felt this way. He said he would vote against the motion because he felt the program was unfair. He said it was appropriate to deny the appeal, thereby asking staff to develop some responses. In response to a question, Mayor Keller said he did not feel the majority of the council would be willing e to deliberate further on the program if the appeal were denied this evening. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Smith, to amend the motion to have the City Council postpone its decision on the appeal until November 9, 1983. Mayor Keller said the council needed the information to make the best decision possible. He said the possible impact of the Woonerf program on the parking program was an important issue and any information available on the issue should be considered. Mayor Keller said there was already a motion on the floor and therefore Mr. Hansen's motion was inappropriate. Councilor Ball said that Mr. Lindberg's motion allowed for revision if any councilors wanted input into the process. He said that the council must accept the fact that staff was more informed on the issues involved and that concerns should be addressed to them. He said the motion to deny the appeal still allowed adjustment of the program according to the concerns of individuals involved and therefore addressed Mr. Hansen's concerns. In response to a question, Mr. Whitlow said staff would like to present the issue again, with the details and factual information available, to the council on November 9, rather than waiting until December. He said that too much delay would cause problems in meeting the Federal guidelines for the program. Mr. Lindberg said it was his understanding that denying the appeal tonight would mean the program would be implemented in one month and delaying the decision on e MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 10, 1983 Page 14