02/13/1985 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e - and "anti-neighborhood and pro-business." The image of the project should be pro-Eugene in a broad sense. She will soon ask the mayor to appoint a commission to work on keeping the city beautiful. Phases 2 and 3 should be constructed within the existing right-of-way. All three phases should be put on the ballot. Ms. Wooten limited her remarks to consideration of the Design Review Committee's recommendation. She pointed out an alignment within the existing right-of-way had not been recommended by the committee. She could not support an alignment the committee had not studied and supported. She did not think all three phases of the project had to be voted on March 26, 1985. Phases 2 and 3 did not have the same thoughtful consideration that Phase 1 had. They might have more acceptance by the voters if they were given more considera- tion. Mr. Hansen served on the Design Review Committee. The committee's charge was to analyze each historic tree and determine if it could be saved. The committee did an outstanding job. The recommended weave alignment indicated that some trees could be saved at a price, but the alignment might not be best for the whole community. People for and against the project indicated they want to vote on the project which had been studied extensively. He did not want to put businesses out of business. He did not want to have a negative impact on residences, vacant properties, and the Salvation Army although that impact had not been discussed. He would support an alignment within the existing right-of-way which would save the trees across from Gray's Feed and Seed. Ms. Ehrman said the issue was difficult for her ward. Most of the constituents who had contacted her were against the project. An alignment within the existing right-of-way would force some people who would support a weave to oppose the project. She would not support an election on an alignment within the existing right-of-way. It would be a breach with the members of the Design Review eommittee. Knowledge that their recommendation might not be accepted might have affected their work. Mr. Miller was concerned about the impact of the alignment on businesses and the ulooku of the street. Some trees could be saved if the streets stayed within the existing right-of-way. It would not be responsible to ask the voters to approve an alignment which seemed to please no one. He would support a minor weave which would have minor impacts on properties, stay primarily within the existing right-of-way, be safe and attractive, and save trees, if possible. Ms. Schue said the streets need to be widened. She compromises when it is possible but, in this case, it was obvious everyone could not be satisfied. Testimony indicated some people are not interested in compromise, they want to prevent the widening of the streets. Saving certain trees would not make any difference to them. Therefore, she had become less interested in saving specific trees. Public money should be used wisely and the weave alignment would cost public money. The price of the trees had become more than the public should pay. She would like to save the trees across from Gray's Feed MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 13, 1985 Page 7