CC Minutes - 04/13/09 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

emissions. He felt that HB 2690 would help increase the number of people who rode bicycles. He opined that bicyclists were a political minority who needed passionate advocacy and “steadfast pursuit” of the goal of promoting bicycling. He believed that the unanimous recommendation of staff to oppose the bill and the unanimous support of the bill by the bicycling community represented the disparity between the “culture” of the City staff and citizens. He asserted that this should be addressed by the City Manager. Bill Eddie , 830 Crest Drive, Ward 2, presented a petition of remonstrance signed by 67 people. He conveyed the belief of the signees that the assessments proposed for the Crest project were “excessive and unfair.” He said the petition was incomplete; he anticipated more residents would sign in the next several days. He stressed that area residents wanted the project to go forward, but they wanted the projects to be built in “an equitable and affordable fashion.” He understood that some councilors thought the process was fair and some thought it was unfair, but he had heard unanimity in the belief that it was unaffordable. He surmised that it could take a full citywide vote to change the assessment methodology, noting that the Crest area residents would support doing so. He stated the residents’ preference, however, to handle this “inhouse” by changing it to a citywide assessment for projects that benefited many people or that surpassed a certain amount of money. He averred that the assessment burden should be shared by more people. He was confident that the final petition of remonstrance, to be submitted to the City Engineer within a week, would contain enough signatures to move the council toward a two-thirds majority vote on the project. He asked the council to vote against moving forward with the Crest Drive/Friendly Street/Storey Boulevard road repair until a more equitable assessment policy was crafted. He felt this should also apply to the Elmira Road/Maple Street project. Eric Selker , 3795 University Street, noted that he also served on the board for GEAR. He estimated that approximately five percent of the people in Oregon use bicycles to commute. He felt that one reason people did not ride more was because it was regarded by people as dangerous, slow, and troublesome when it rained. He said people tried to ride in safe places, but it was slower to go through the residential neighbor- hoods. He suggested that allowing bicyclists to roll through stop signs when there was no traffic would encourage bicyclists to get off the main thoroughfares and would make it safer for both cars and bikes. He asked the councilors to reconsider and support HB 2690. Michal Young , 2310 McLean Boulevard, echoed support expressed for HB 2690. He averred that they were not talking about “annoying” bicyclist behavior; they were talking about allowing people to roll through a stop sign only if there was no other traffic. Erika Kronenberg , 3490 Elmira Road, said there was a large portion of the populace in the Elmira Road/Maple Street area that must utilize Elmira Road, designated a collector, to get to where they needed to go. She averred that there were at least 300 homes in the area. She thought a change in the assessment practice would defer the cost for all of the residents in that area. She pointed out that the neighborhood was largely working class people who were able to make their mortgage and not much more. She stressed that they were individuals who wanted to remain in their homes and who wanted to be treated fairly. She asked the City Council to consider a way to change the rules and to work with the City and the people who lived in the area to see if they could make a difference. Erika Winters , 1661 River Road, said she was a Tactics Team Rider for the ladies team, formerly of the Shelter Indoor Skate Park and she was an advocate for Skaters for Eugene Skate Park. She was honored to speak before her peers to endorse the proposed city center skate park. She averred that skaters had tried everything to survive the rain in Eugene, from “sketchy backyard ramps” to mops and leaf-blowers. She said they had considered indoor skate parks and rebuilding existing skate parks, but had found that the cost- gain model did not hold true with the exception of the city center skate park blueprint. She was glad the City was willing to consider their proposal. She discussed the “gains” she believed the $500,000 park MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 13, 2009 Page 4 Regular Meeting