CC Minutes - 12/12/05 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

original PROS plan had been created for a project list since “removed” from the plan, but now the plan was “insufficient to stand alone” as the guiding document for Eugene’s parks for the next 20 years. She thought it was made up of a long list of possible park improvements and acquisitions accompanied by a long list of potential funding sources with no real plan for implementation. She did not think the plan should be adopted in its present state. She claimed the plan continued to pay lip service to the idea of creating a balanced, equitable system of parks and recreation services, but did little advance this aim. She referred to Table B-2, which delineated the planning sub-area of River Road and Santa Clara. She underscored that Santa Clara was grossly underserved. She submitted her testimony in writing. Ellen Hyman , 3863 Dorchester Lane, said there were no major differences between the first draft of the plan and the one that was before the council except that the entire priority list had been eliminated. She opined that this rendered the document useless “except as nicely worded fluff.” She observed that since the 1970s there had been public record conversations about the need for parks and opens spaces in Santa Clara. She thought in reading the documents one would think there was a huge commitment to ensure the core values of equitable distribution of parks and open spaces within the community. She did not think the PROS Plan indicated how this equity would be achieved. She reiterated the need for more park area in Santa Clara. She opined that if the PROS Plan was the blueprint for a bond measure, then the 1998 bond measure clearly delineated what funds should be spent on. She stated that according to expenditures, $3 million had not been spent, including spending designated for four planned projects. She said money from the bond measure was used for planning, including $33,000 for signage, nearly $250,000 for the PROS plan ($104,000 from SDCs), and almost $500,000 for projects that were not identified or approved in the original bond measure. She averred that this did not include $8 million in SDC money, much of which was collected from Santa Clara. She declared that of the $25 million in the bond measure, only $387,000 had been spent in Santa Clara for the development of two parks. She commented that she would be hard-pressed to support another bond measure for parks given how the money had been spent thus far. Larry Reed , of JRH Transportation Engineering at 4765 Village Plaza Loop, submitted his testimony in writing. He opined that the PROS Plan was fatally flawed. He based his position on three premises: 1. The plan did not take into account the open space owned by the County, State, and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in the West Eugene Wetlands Plan area nor the Willamette Greenway. It also overlooked the park space located at school sites. He thought this could open the door for lawsuits as these lands were required to be included in the inventory by law. 2. The plan was premature and out of balance and was not done in conjunction with other planning elements such as community housing, homelessness, economic development, job growth and transportation. 3. If the City adopted this plan, the City Council’s hands would be tied in the future as the City staff would instruct the council that it could not revisit these goals and policies. Mr. Reed asked the council to send the plan back to the staff with the direction to review, incorporate, and coordinate this “great vision” into the community’s broader land use planning. Debbie Jeffries , 3800 North Delta Highway, concurred with the remarks of Mr. Reed. She thought the main flaw of the PROS plan was that it lacked a foundation of facts. She said the plan omitted almost 3,000 acres including the McKenzie River and the Willamette River, both of which were within the planning region outside the City and metropolitan planning area. She wished to remind people that her property was not inside the city boundaries and she had not received any notice about the plan, although it included land outside the city. She averred that the process had not defined that it was going outside the city’s boundaries MINUTES—Eugene City Council December 12, 2005 Page 6 Regular Session