Item B: I-5/Franklin Update - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY: 1-5 WILLAMETTE RIVER CROSSING I GLENWOOD FACILITY PLAN PHASE II TABLE 3. OPEN HOUSE #2 (DECEMBER 5, 2005 - NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS, EUGENE) Should the study go forward? . Yes o Yes, but. . . No, unless. . . No Number of Responses 7 10 16 12 OPEN HOUSE SUMMARY-012406.DOC Most common responses Category 1 (1). Concerns for noise and mitigation (2); what about neighborhood acceptance and concerns (2); it will bring economic benefit to the area and is needed for the downtown and to create a 'front door' (2); concern for the park/environment/river (1); concern over funding source (1); promote alternative transport/bikes (1); keep the on/off, north-south ramps on same junction (1). Category 1 (1); Category 2 (1); Category 4 (2). Concern for environment/park/river (3); concern for access into and out of, preservation, and negative impacts to Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood (6); concern over traffic distribution into neighborhoods and maintaining local access to 1-5 (3); need more information (2); economic benefits seem substantial (1); concern that this project is taking money away from other projects (1); would like to see the impacts to traffic/congestion at other interchanges due to this project (1); think outside of the box (1); need to upgrade the 1-5 ramps at Glenwood (1); must keep Glenwood exit open and functional (1); diamond ramps are a waste of time and money (1); concern about hazardous was and related expenses (1); plan for long term future growth (1). Prefer Category 4 (8). concern for noise (6); concern for environment/river/park/wetlands (7); concern for impact to neighborhood (1); concern about increased traffic and congestion (3); maintain local access to 1-5, Laurel Hill, and Glenwood (5); maintain bike access to Riverfront (1); impacts outweigh benefits (1); don't divert money away from other projects (2); must give local concerns high priority (1); how necessary is this project (1); limit reconstruction to Glenwood (2); unless traffic becomes a severe problem (1); consider alternative funding options (1); improve signage (1); no more than 2 bridges, otherwise eyesore and environmentally damaging (1); need better estimates of future growth/demand (1). Use Category 4 if needed (3). Neighborhood, historical, and environmental resources would be crushed (2); money should be spent on failing infrastructure (4); use signage to improve traffic flow (1); rethink site of UO arena (1); concern for the environment (4); cost is prohibitive (3); current exits work well (2); concern of building downstream of dams (1); consider peak oil (1); purpose of 1-5 is to access downtowns only (1); all categories would diminish access from neighborhoods to Franklin Blvd for bikers (1); concern for noise (1); should be developed on a long-term schedule (1); impacts outweigh the benefits (1). Did not choose a response, only said "great presentation"