Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Mr. Gleason stated that the program was a demonstration and thereby required <br /> experimentation. He stated that staff was committed to experimenting to develop <br /> e a solution and that for the first time all the participants were eager to <br /> provide input for improvement. He added that the focus of attention was on the <br /> program and that the City had two years to work on it. He said that a better <br /> program might be developed, but it would not necessarily please everyone. <br /> Mayor Keller questioned if the City's committment was for an 18-month program. <br /> Mr. Hanks stated that changes could not be made month to month, but he estimated <br /> that problems identified during the first year could be accommodated in the <br /> second year of the program. He said staff could make changes as necessary, <br /> stating that half of the C and 0 zones had already been eliminated from the <br /> program based on the interests of the people involved. He said that one result <br /> of a demonstration project could be to show that the project was bad. He said <br /> he believed that after two years the program would be different. <br /> In response to a desire by a citizen to present testimony, Mayor Keller explained <br /> that the public hearing had been concluded at the previous meeting. He stated <br /> that he would provide the opportunity to speak if time allowed. <br /> Councilor Ball said it appeared progress was being made in the program, the best <br /> result of the program being the participation of the area institutions. He <br /> stated he did not feel ~bligated to provide unlimited free parking for commuters <br /> and employees in the area, adding that Eugene was no longer a small town. He <br /> added that the concerns and needs of the area homeowners could not be overlooked. <br /> Councilor Lindberg stated there were many policies which supported implementation <br /> e of the program. While the first attempt at consensus was not successful, he <br /> wanted to compliment the individuals who had participated in the development of <br /> the program. He said that effort must be continued so that the program progressed <br /> with any necessary changes. <br /> Mr. Gleason, adding to the staff report, stated that staff hoped to work more <br /> aggressively to make the state willing to provide an adequate parking program for <br /> the University. <br /> Councilor Obie stated he still had concerns that the staff presentation did not <br /> reflect the concerns identified in the letters and telephone calls from citizens, <br /> and that the suggestion of high community support was possibly erroneous. He <br /> said he was troubled by the desire to move ahead with the program without <br /> addressing those concerns and said that three alternatives would be to pass the <br /> proposal, refer the proposal to the advisory committee to deal with the issues. <br /> or have more work performed by the council, possibly in a subcommittee. He said <br /> he wished to hear more opinion from the council. <br /> Councilor Hansen said he was concerned with collecting the $17.50 fee from an <br /> individual who could afford it. thereby denying someone else an equal chance to <br /> park on the public street. He said the goal was to create parking for the <br /> residents, and, although he realized that the federal grant was based on that <br /> fee, he did not feel that charging a fee was a good idea. He suggested the <br /> alternative of a two-hour parking restriction from 9 a.m. until 6 p.m. He <br /> e <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 16, 1983 Page 7 <br />