CC Minutes - 09/25/06 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the towers were greatly concerned that one would fall on them, too. He said EWEB agreed to replace the two fallen towers and the two next to them with steel towers. While he felt that was a good start, he did not think it was enough. He stated that EWEB would not replace a fifth tower, the one that was immediately north of the one that had failed, although it was leaning. He related that EWEB indicated that the tower would not lean after the wires were reconnected. He did not feel this was reassuring, especially to the residents who could see the leaning tower from their windows. He stated that the towers had been placed there in the 1970s prior to any residences and were supposed to stand for at least 100 years. He thought EWEB’s 35-year-old assumptions were not valid today. He questioned how EWEB could think that it would not happen again. He said according to meteorologists violent weather was on the rise and predicted there would be more storms of great magnitude. He reiterated Ms. Renkert’s requests for more information and cooperation in rerouting the towers. Renee Gottesman , 473 Covey Lane, member of the board of the QRHA, had been out of town when the towers fell. She had been shocked to return to the damage that occurred. She said people had lost confidence in the structures. She related that she was present at the EWEB meeting at which the Quail Run residents testified. She was disappointed in EWEB’s response to this situation. She hoped that the City Council could exert some influence on EWEB. Matt Svoboda , 492 Covey Lane, stated that he and his wife looked out their bedroom window at the leaning transmission tower. He related that it was scary to look at. He urged EWEB to replace it with a more stable tower or, better yet, to move the whole set of towers. He read the tail end of Ms. Renkert’s statement as she had run out of time. Ms. Renkert wanted to emphasize that this type of transmission tower was in use in many different areas of the community. She wished to underscore that EWEB’s Website encouraged the public to participate in the utility’s process. She no longer believed this was true. Keith Nastiuk , 489 Covey Lane, stated that the number one issue the QRHA was addressing was that EWEB felt the utility facilities were there first and, therefore, should not be relocated. He averred that the dynamics of the area had changed and there was now a community of 200 people living there; some residents with a sizable investment in the area. He believed EWEB officials needed to sit down with all of the residents in order to provide them with the opportunity to work with EWEB staff to relocate the towers. He asserted that the towers no longer belonged there. Kate Perle , 4740 Wendover Street, registered her opposition to the “ongoing street annexations” in the River Road/Santa Clara area. She had seen a notice on a telephone pole regarding a street annexation scheduled to be considered on October 5. She was angered by this, as street annexations were supposed to be voluntary. She alleged that the residents who applied for annexation of their property in order to get a building permit were asked by staff if the street adjacent to them could be “piggybacked” onto their annexation and the residents had said no. She alleged that staff had proceeded with this annexation request anyway. She felt the street annexations were surrounding residents and removing from them the right to vote should “wholesale” annexation eventually happen. She called this an insidious, underhanded, and highly unfriendly treatment of the community. She asserted that City staff talked about annexation and likened it to being a band-aid that needed to be ripped off and would only hurt for a little bit. She found this offensive because the River Road/Santa Clara area was “not a sore on the edge of Eugene.” Rather, it was a “vibrant, valuable community” that she felt the City should treat with dignity and respect. She averred that the River Road/Santa Clara community was filled with capable collaborative “folks” who were interested in a positive future, but if City staff “continued to step on peoples’ toes” it would cause irreparable harm to area residents’ trust. She stated that both the Santa Clara Community Organization and the River Road Community Organization opposed connecting street annexations with property MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 25, 2006 Page 2 Regular Meeting