CC Minutes - 05/29/02 JEO - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

already identified. He noted the effort and money that had gone into planning for the parkway, and that the first phase was already included in the State's plans and the funding allocated. He said the parkway was the project ODOT wanted to fund. Funding decisions for future phases would be made as time passed. He said that the parkway would help relieve the use of arterials that were being degraded by overuse. Mr. Forrest asked the adopting officials to respect the vote of the public. He believed the findings demonstrated the parkway was viable and feasible. Bob Cassidy, 1401 East 27th Avenue, Eugene, discounted the importance of the vote to the decision at hand. He said that the majority of votes was insignificant. He said that building a road because of a vote of the people was "crazy," even if the majority had been larger. There were other facts to consider. He said that the jobs in Eugene were going to people living outside the community, and now it was being proposed to spend money to make that even more possible. He said that no one was talking about trains or buses to serve those communities. He said that voting for the parkway would be to promote division. Rusty Rexius, 86301 Panorama Road, Pleasant Hill, Vice President of Rexius Forest Byproducts, said that there was a congestion problem on West 11th Avenue that needed to be fixed. He asked the adopting officials to make the right decisions, and indicated support for the findings developed by staff. He said that he was a third-generation local business owner in the community, and future business owners need the help of the adopting officials to make Eugene an economically viable community. Mara Wile, 1347 Dalton Street, Eugene, objected to discussions of the vote because those living in the unincorporated area of River Road/Santa Clara did not get to vote. She opposed the parkway because it would affect other transportation priorities and the money was not there. She urged the adopting officials to disqualify the vote because not all those affected got to vote. She said that money should be spent to fix existing roads, such as Beltline. Tom Slocum, 1950 Graham Drive, supported the parkway. He called on the Eugene council to respect the vote. He did not consider the vote to be advisory, as was asserted by some. He pointed out that the competing measure was soundly defeated by the voters. He acknowledged the parkway would affect wetlands but thought the impact could be mitigated. He said that the divisive issue before the community was a question of growth. Some want no growth at all, but people want to move to the community. He said that over the past two years he perceived a dismantling of the planning process. He said that without planning, growth would be chaotic. Peter Lark was not present when called on to speak. Sue Wolling was not present when called on to speak. Celia Levine was not present when called on to speak. Majesta Seese-Green, 549 Van Buren Street, noted the opposition to the parkway represented by the vote in the Whiteaker neighborhood. She opposed the parkway because of its costs and its affect on neighborhood livability. She noted her preference for the LUTRAQ approach. She said that the parkway would create traffic problems in her neighborhood because she feared 6th/7th avenues would become a freeway. Pedestrian traffic would be more difficult in the Whiteaker neighborhood. She believed the parkway would generate sprawl, affecting all residents, and would mean the "death of downtown" and the "death of Whiteaker." Dan Montgomery, Eugene, asked the adopting officials to listen to the voters and not second- guess their understanding of the issue. The voters understood what they were voting for. He said MINUTES--Joint Adopting Officials May 29, 2002 Page 12