My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/16/1985 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1985
>
12/16/1985 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2007 9:12:14 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 4:52:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
12/16/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> Ms. Ehrman agreed that Alternative One, elevated, is the best option even <br /> . though displacement of businesses is not pleasant. She does not believe that <br /> the City Council needs to reconsider the other alternatives and felt <br /> comfortable with the Citizen Advisory Committee recommendation. <br /> Ms. Wooten was also uncomfortable with the necessity for making a decision <br /> under pressure. She understood the necessity of getting the project into the <br /> Six-Year Program, but asked if the project was critical within two years and <br /> if waiting would be a deterrent. <br /> Ms. Bascom was concerned about receiving an affirmative vote and the need to <br /> design a winnable alternative. She expressed her preference for Alternative <br /> One, elevated, but did not like being pressured into a decision. <br /> After several questions, Mr. Gleason said that all alternatives presented <br /> would be workable, but that the State will make the decision. The Ci ty <br /> Council can give input, but can only vote on a corridor which is already <br /> approved by the State. <br /> There was considerable discussion about whether it was necessary to make a <br /> decision now, or if it were possible to explore other alternatives and still <br /> make the March ballot deadline. Mr. Gix reminded the councilors that the <br /> public hearing held by the State is to approve the EIS. If more information <br /> is needed, they will continue the study, but there is no project yet. The re <br /> needs to be an affirmative vote to have one, in order for the State to <br /> recognize a sense of cooperation from the community. Mr. Holmer agreed that <br /> -- the City needs to go to the Transportation Commission unanimously committed to <br /> the corridor extension, and, therefore, the council needs more time. <br /> Ms. Brody reminded the council that the Planning Commission received a wide <br /> range of testimony on the draft EIS, accepted the proposal, and recommended <br /> elevation unanimously. <br /> After more discussion, Ms. Bascom reiterated that there is no expressed <br /> sentiment by the council, that we don't need the expressway, and that citizen <br /> approval is a requirement in Eugene. <br /> The work session was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. <br /> Re~ <br /> ~ e~l ~.~le ~~ - - - <br /> Ci ty Manager <br /> (Recorded by Judy Jernberg) <br /> JJ:pv/EA34 <br /> e <br /> MINUTES--City Council Work Session December 16, 1985 Page 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.