12/04/1985 Meeting (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

proposed alignments merely indicated the corridor within which the highway was e proposed and were not site-specific, and that language was included requiring further study to determine a precise alignment. She also said staff had known for about 2-1/2 years that all alternatives addressed in the E1S were being considered, and information about the project was available. She said the Willamette Valley Company was not convinced its reliance upon the T-2000 and Metro Plans was misplaced. She said it would be reasonable to assume that precise location of a proposed street would be subject to site-specific analysis and to a certain amount of expected deviation. The deviation between the two alternatives, however, was well outside acceptable limits. She noted that the company had improved its manufacturing warehouse facility in 1983, installing numerous storage tanks at large expense and requiring city permit approval. She said the company had not been advised that an alignment other than that indicated in the two plans was being considered. Ms. Cohen also noted that national Environmental Protection Act regulations pursuant to which the draft E1S currently was being circulated prohibited any action concerning the proposal that would limit the choice of a reasonable alternative, adding that the limitation applied to both state and local agenies. She suggested that adoption of the draft TransPlan with the Sixth-Seventh extension as presently delineated would violate the prohibition and urged that adoption of TransPlan be delayed until after final adoption of the Sixth-Seventh extension project alignment. Pete Lafferty, P.O. Box 2066, (Seneca Road), said he felt the extension of a good freeway from 1-105 to the west was inevitable. He said Roosevelt Avenue e originally had been the planned location of that route and should be the focus of current efforts. He said it could greatly relieve the pressure on West 11th at least as well as the extension of Sixth-Seventh. He also said he thought three arterials would be overbuilt, adding that the improvement to Roosevelt would cost less for condemnation, would do less to disrupt business and to congest the flow of traffic, and would have more limited access in the area between Garfield and Seneca streets. He said Sixth-Seventh would not lend easily to future use as a freeway, and he felt 1-105 should be kept in the TransPlan with a connector to the west. Mr. Lafferty said he understood the concern that moving back to the original route after selling off the right-of-way was difficult, but that was not sufficient reason for dropping the best possible route and going with the "poor second" of Sixth and Seventh Avenues. Richard Gold, 2354 Emerald Street, read a statement submitted for the record, outlining his concerns about inadequate public participation in planning and about an open public process for appointing members of advisory groups. The statement also discussed the recommendation referring to the 293,700 population level identified in TransPlan and in the Metro Plan and deletion of a specific year; along with the fact that the City of Eugene was behind in maintenance and upkeep of existing facilities; amendments to population figures; inadequate listing of air pollutants and projected noise levels; and why all project alternatives were not pictured on the street map. e M1NUTES--Joint Elected Officials Hearing--TransPlan December 4, 1985 Page 8