Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Taylor reiterated her desire that there be no ballot at all. She said that possible lost funding was no <br />excuse for considering the matter in such haste. She stressed that there was no funding source for the <br />parkway except by dropping other projects. She stressed the importance of not acting in haste and said that <br />she would vote against any proposed ballot. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey supported the two-question option. He expressed his trust in the City Manager and staff to <br />construct ballot language that would reflect the legislative intent of the councilors. He added that, in the <br />event that councilors were out of town, they should make themselves available electronically, He urged the <br />council to resolve the issue and move on. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he would support the two-measure option if key points were mentioned in the resolution. He <br />raised concern over the information that would be presented in the campaign. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ expressed his desire to see something get on the ballot. He was in favor of the single-option <br />resolution. He raised concern that it was misleading voters to offer the two options and added that there was <br />potential to have improvements in other areas as well as having the West Eugene Parkway. However, he <br />would support the dual question resolution if the majority of the council did so. He noted that alternative <br />improvements would also affect the wetlands. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Farr regarding confirmation that zoning and planning in west Eugene <br />was based on the existence of the parkway, Dave Reinhard, of the City of Eugene Public Works Depart- <br />ment, confirmed that the existence of the parkway was the basis of planning in that area. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr raised concern that the traffic situation in west Eugene was getting worse and stressed that if the <br />parkway was not built then something else needed to happen quickly. He noted that there was funding in <br />place for the first phase of the parkway and added that he did not want to see councilors not representing <br />west Eugene make decisions that would affect the citizens of west Eugene for years to come. He urged the <br />council to put the matter on a ballot. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding what the West Eugene Wetlands Plan assumed <br />about roads and the parkway alignment, Jan Childs said that the plan would need to be amended to allow the <br />parkway. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson noted that the writers of the West Eugene Wetlands Plan had taken into account the planned <br />parkway. She added that wetland mitigation rules, set in place by the plan, would require double the acres <br />of wetlands used by the parkway to be restored in another location. She expressed her desire to see the <br />council vote on both resolutions and raised concern that there was no information about the impacts or costs <br />of any measures besides the parkway taken to address traffic problems in west Eugene. <br /> <br /> Ms. Taylor, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to approve Resolution 4687 (Resolution <br /> A), a resolution of the City of Eugene, Lane County, Oregon, calling a special elec- <br /> tion to submit a measure to the voters of the City concerning the construction and <br /> route of the West Eugene Parkway. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said that he would not support the motion. He said that he was not interested in the single <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />