The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 5: Crest Drive Community Team Recommendations ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Action: Crest Drive Community Team Recommended Design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street Meeting Date: April 14, 2008 Agenda Item Number: 5 Department: Public Works Engineering Staff Contact: Mark Schoening www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5243 ISSUE STATEMENT The council is requested to approve the design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and Friendly Street as recommended by the Crest Drive Community Team (CDCT). BACKGROUND City Council Action History The City Council adopted the November 1999 Eugene Street Classification Map with the adoption of Ordinance Number 20181 on November 22, 1999. The streets in the Crest Drive Neighborhood were left unclassified pending a study to determine the appropriate classifications and design standards for the neighborhood. Attachment A is a map of the Crest Drive Neighborhood. The City Council directed the City Manager to implement the Crest Drive Neighborhood context sensitive solutions (CSS) process on May 8, 2006. A General Fund appropriation of $240,000 was approved as part of the FY07 budget to fund the CSS process. The definition of CSS follows: Context Sensitive Solutions is a collaborative, interdisciplinary project development approach that involves all stakeholders to develop a transportation facility that fits its physical setting while maintaining safety and mobility for all users, and reflecting community needs. The goal of CSS is to create early, open, honest, and continuous communication and sharing of information and knowledge throughout the design process. The City Council appropriated an additional $58,000 as part of Supplemental Budget #1 of FY07 to expand the scope of the CSS process to include Middle Crest. The City Council amended the Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways on October 22, 2007, to allow for a minimum street width of 18 feet (two 9- foot travel lanes) in the Crest Drive area. At the council work session held on January 23, 2008, the council was presented the Crest Drive Community Team’s recommended design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and Friendly Street. On February 19, 2008, the City Council held a public hearing on the recommended design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard, and Friendly Street. F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080414\S0804145.doc Crest Drive Community Team Recommendation The Crest Drive Community Team (CDCT) was selected by the Crest Drive Citizens Association and included property owners on the identified streets, at-large neighborhood representatives and City staff. At the start of the context sensitive solutions process the CDCT developed a set of themes and values (Attachment B) including environmental and ecological, aesthetic, cultural and historic, spiritual, and economic values. The CDCT used the themes and values to evaluate the different design concepts before reaching an overall design recommendation. The CDCT completed its mission on December 6, 2007, with the following recommendation: The Crest Drive Community Team recommends the 60% design concept for the identified sections of Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street as shown on the plan view drawings. The street design includes a street width of 18 feet (two nine-foot travel lanes) and a sidewalk on one side of the street for all of Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street. The sidewalk will be setback from the street for a little less than half the total length of sidewalk. The side of the street (uphill or downhill) that the sidewalk is located on varies throughout the design. Traffic calming elements will be located on all of the streets and includes 17 speed tables, 2 traffic circles, 6 medians, and one choker. Stormwater facilities include a combination of vegetated swales, filter strips and rain gardens to address water quality and a combination of open waterways and stormwater pipes to address conveyance. The recommended design was presented at a general meeting of the Crest Drive Citizens Association (CDCA) on January 15, 2008. The CDCA passed a motion (Attachment C) recommending approval of the design concept for Crest Drive, Friendly Street and Storey Boulevard at its general meeting held on February 12, 2008. Public Comment At the public hearing before the City Council,15 individuals testified. A significant amount of the public testimony supported the recommended design concept. However, there was also a significant amount of public testimony that believed the recommended design concept did not adequately or safely accommodate bicyclists. A substantial number of written public comments (Attachment D) have been submitted subsequent to the public hearing. Similar to the public hearing comments, there are a significant number of public comments supporting the recommended design concept and a significant number of public comments stating that the recommended design concept does not adequately or safely accommodate bicyclists. There were also comments received about the classification of the streets in the Crest Drive area and on assessments to abutting property owners to fund the improvements. RELATED CITY POLICIES Transplan Goal #2: Transportation System Characteristics Enhance the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area’s quality of life and economic opportunity by providing a transportation system that is: F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080414\S0804145.doc a.Balanced b.Accessible c.Efficient d.Safe e.Inter-connected f.Environmentally responsible g.Supportive of responsible and sustainable development h.Responsive to community needs and neighborhood impacts i.Economically viable and financially stable COUNCIL OPTIONS The council may: 1.Approve the design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street as recommended by the Crest Drive Community Team. 2.Direct staff to develop alternative design concepts to better accommodate bicyclists. 3.Take no action. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends that the City Council approve the design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street as recommended by the Crest Drive Community Team. Although there was significant concern raised by a broad cross section of the bicycling community that the recommended design does not adequately or safely accommodate bicyclists, the recommended design meets the themes and values important to the neighborhood as established by the Crest Drive Community Team. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the design for Crest Drive, Storey Boulevard and Friendly Street as recommended by the Crest Drive Community Team. ATTACHMENTS A. Map of the Crest Drive Neighborhood B. Themes and Values C. CDCA Motion Supporting the CDCT Recommended Design D. Written Public Comments FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Mark Schoening Telephone: 682-5243 Staff E-Mail: mark.a.schoening@ci.eugene.or.us F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080414\S0804145.doc Crest Drive Community Team Themes and Values ValuesPhysical Aspects Protect existing trees, canopy, critical root zone, biomass Environmental and Ecological Value: Enhance stream corridors, filter water using Preserve natural character of neighborhood Best Management Practices Revegetate, prevent erosion (Trees, vegetation, habitat, stream corridors, etc.) Build habitat Invasive species removal and habitat enhancement Slow moving traffic Balance of pavement and green structure Aesthetic, Cultural and Historic Value: Maintain rural views and relationship to natural Preserve country feel in the city contours (Country lane feel, historic homes and land) Maintain views and context of historic homes, parks and roadway Minimize realignment of road horizontally Slow traffic Visibility Functional Value: Emergency access Safety for all modes and all users Safe alternative modes locations Safe for people and the environment Stormwater management and street grading (ice) Utility placement Traffic calming and slow speed street design Appropriately scaled lighting, strategic placement Spiritual Value: Thoughtful design for multiple modes – not “Livability” in balance with “mobility” just cars Emphasize “people-centric” design for neighborhood Maintain and enhance livability of adjacent (as opposed to CAR – centric) homes and properties Ecology and environment are in balance with presence of traffic in neighborhood Transportation improvements appropriately chosen and scaled to address project goals Economic Value: yet avoid unnecessary financial burden for Balance of design features with financial expendituresadjacent property owners. and economic value to adjacent neighbors Transportation improvements considered in balance with impacts to adjacent property values. èíïÛÃÍÊÛÎØùÓÈÃùÍÇÎÙÓÐ öêíï ùÊ×ÉÈøÊÓÆ×ùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃè×ÛÏûØÆÓÉÍÊÃõÊÍÇÌ ðÛÇÊÛúÛÓÐ×ÃöÊÛÎÑùÛÐÙÓÛÎÍèÓÎÛõÊÃÙ éÔ×ÊÓ×ôÛÅÐ×ÃöÊ×ØðÍÊÓÉÔòÍÔÎêÇØ× ñÛÈÔÃéÛÊÛÎÌÛï×ÕéÈ×ÅÛÊÈéÏÓÈÔùÛÈÔÊÃÎèÊ×ÛØÅÛÃ ê÷ûÌÊÓÐÆÍÈ×ÉÍÎØ×ÉÓÕÎÛÎØÉÓØ×ÅÛÐÑÅÓØÈÔÉ å×ÛÊ×ÛÅÛÊ×ÈÔÛÈÍÆ×ÊÈÔ×ÌÛÉÈÖ×ÅÅ××ÑÉÃÍÇÔÛÆ×Ê×Ù×ÓÆ×ØÆÍÐÇÏ×ÉÍÖÏÛÓÐÙÍÎÙ×ÊÎÓÎÕÈÔ× ùÊ×ÉÈøÊÓÆ×Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØÊÍÛØÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÏÍÉÈÍÖÓÈÖÛÆÍÊÓÎÕÛÎÇÌÔÓÐÐÚÓÑ×ÌÛÈÔå×ÔÛÆ×Ú××Î ÙÍÎÉÌÓÙÇÍÇÉÐÃËÇÓ×ÈíÇÊÉÓÐ×ÎÙ×ÍÅ×ÉÈÍÍÇÊÊ×ÛÐÓÂÛÈÓÍÎÈÔÛÈÃÍÇÔÛÆ×ÛÐÊ×ÛØÃÔ×ÛÊØÍÇÊØ×ÈÛÓÐ×Ø È×ÉÈÓÏÍÎÃãÍÇÔÛÆ×Ê×ÛØÍÇÊØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÉÛÎØÌÍÇÊ×ØÍÆ×ÊÈÔ×Ø×ÉÓÕÎÌÐÛÎÉîÍÈÔÓÎÕÅ×ÅÓÐÐÉÛÃ ÙÛÎÛØØÈÍÈÔ×Å×ÓÕÔÈÍÖÈÔ×È×ÉÈÓÏÍÎÃúÇÈÓÈÕÍ×ÉÅÓÈÔÍÇÈÉÛÃÓÎÕÅ×ÙÍÎÈÓÎÇ×ÈÍÊ×ÏÛÓÎ ÆÓÕÓÐÛÎÈÙÍÎÙ×ÊÎ×ØÛÎØÓÎÆÍÐÆ×ØÅ×ÅÓÐÐÛÈÈ×ÎØÈÔ×ûÌÊÓÐÈÔÏ××ÈÓÎÕÓÎÖÍÊÙ× ûÉÈÔ×ûÌÊÓÐùÍÇÎÙÓÐÏ××ÈÓÎÕÐÍÍÏÉÅ×ÔÛÆ×ÈÔÊ××ÓÏÌÍÊÈÛÎÈÌÍÓÎÈÉÈÍÏÛÑ× ÛÉÛÕÊÍÇÌÅ×ÔÛÆ×ÖÍÐÐÍÅ×ØÃÍÇÊÓÎÉÈÊÇÙÈÓÍÎÉÈÍÈÔ×Ð×ÈÈ×Êå×ÔÛÆ×Ê×ÈÇÊÎ×ØÈÍÃÍÇÅÔ×Î Å×Ö×ÐÈÍÇÊØ×ÉÓÕÎÊ×ËÇÓÊ×ØÛÐÍÍÉ×ÎÓÎÕÍÖÊ×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎÉÛÎØÊ×ÕÇÐÛÈÓÍÎÉíÆ×ÊÈÅÍÃ×ÛÊÉÅ×ÔÛÆ× ÐÍÕÕ×ØÙÍÇÎÈÐ×ÉÉÔÍÇÊÉÓÎÏ××ÈÓÎÕÉÙÍÎØÇÙÈÓÎÕÊ×É×ÛÊÙÔÛÎØÓÎÈ×ÊÛÙÈÓÎÕÅÓÈÔÍÇÊÎ×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÉ ãÍÇÔÛÆ×Ú××ÎÇÌØÛÈ×ØÍÎÎÇÏ×ÊÍÇÉÍÙÙÛÉÓÍÎÉÛÎØùÓÈÃÉÈÛÖÖÔÛÉÅÍÊÑ×ØØÓÊ×ÙÈÐÃÅÓÈÔÇÉÛÉ ×ËÇÛÐÉå×ØÓØÈÔÓÉÊÓÕÍÊÍÇÉØ×ÏÛÎØÓÎÕÅÍÊÑÓÎÕÍÍØÖÛÓÈÔûÈÎÍÌÍÓÎÈÛÐÍÎÕÈÔ×ÅÛÃØÓØÃÍÇ ÓÎÉÓÉÈÈÔÛÈÃÍÇÊÍÅÎÌ×ÈÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉÍÊÓØ×ÛÉÚ×ÙÍÏ×ÛÌÛÊÈÍÖÈÔ×ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈúÇÈÎÍÅÛÈÈÔ×ÐÛÉÈ ÏÓÎÇÈ×ÚÓÑ×ÐÛÎ×ÉÛÊ×ÛÎÓÉÉÇ×èÔ×ÃÛÊ×ÛÎÓÉÉÇ×ÖÍÊÌÍÐÓÈÓÙÛÐÊ×ÛÉÍÎÉÎÍÈÌÊÛÙÈÓÙÛÐÍÊØ×ÉÓÕÎ Ê×ÛÉÍÎÉûÉÅ×ÔÛÆ××ÄÌÐÛÓÎ×ØÍÎÏÛÎÃÍÙÙÛÉÓÍÎÉÅ×ÔÛÆ×ÈÛÑ×ÎÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÉÓÎÈÍÛÙÙÍÇÎÈå× Ø×ÉÓÕÎ×ØÛÊÍÛØÈÔÊÍÇÕÔÛÎ×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØÛÊÍÛØÈÔÛÈÖÇÎÙÈÓÍÎÉÖÍÊÆ×ÔÓÙÇÐÛÊÈÊÛÖÖÓÙÛÉÅ×ÐÐÛÉ Ì×Ø×ÉÈÊÓÛÎûÐÐÏÍØ×ÉÅ×Ê×ÙÍÎÉÓØ×Ê×ØÛÐÐÉÍÊÈÉÍÖÛØÛÌÈÛÈÓÍÎÉÛÎØÙÍÏÌÊÍÏÓÉ×ÉÅ×Ê× ÙÍÎÉÓØ×Ê×Øå×ÛÉÛÕÊÍÇÌÅÓÈÔÙÍÎÙ×ÊÎ×ØÚÓÙÃÙÐÓÉÈÓÎÌÇÈÙÍÎÙÐÇØ×ØÈÔÛÈÉÐÍÅÓÎÕÈÊÛÖÖÓÙÅÛÉ ÈÔ×Ú×ÉÈÏ×ÛÎÉÍÖÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉÓÎÕÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÉÛÖ×ÈÃå×ÙÛÎtÈ×ÏÌÔÛÉÓÂ×ÈÔÓÉÌÍÓÎÈ×ÎÍÇÕÔ Ú×ÙÛÇÉ×ÈÔÓÉÓÉÉÇ×ÔÛÉÚ×ÙÍÏ×ÌÍÐÓÈÓÙÛÐÓÈÓÉÚ×ÓÎÕÖÊÛÏ×ØÓÎÆ×ÊÃÎÛÊÊÍÅÈ×ÊÏÉèÔ× ùøùèÓÉÆÓ×Å×ØÛÉÛÎÈÓÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÛÎØÛÎÈÓÙÔÓÐØå×ÛÊ×É××ÎÛÉÚ×ÓÎÕÛÕÛÓÎÉÈÛÉÇÉÈÛÓÎÛÚÐ×ÖÇÈÇÊ× Ú×ÙÛÇÉ×Å×ÔÛÆ×ÎÍÈÏÛØ×ÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÉÈÔ×ÌÍÉÈ×ÊÙÔÓÐØÍÖÍÇÊØ×ÉÓÕÎå×ÔÛÆ×Ú××ÎÙÔÛÊÛÙÈ×ÊÓÂ×ØÛÉ ÎÍÈÙÛÊÓÎÕÛÚÍÇÈÙÔÓÐØÊ×ÎÉÉÛÖ×ÈÃÍÎÈÔ×ÅÛÃÈÍÉÙÔÍÍÐ×Æ×ÎÈÔÍÇÕÔÅ×ÔÛÆ×ÙÍÎÉÙÓÍÇÉÐÃ É×ÌÛÊÛÈ×ØÉÓØ×ÅÛÐÑÉÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÊÍÛØÅÔ×Î×Æ×ÊÌÍÉÉÓÚÐ×ÖÍÊÒÇÉÈÈÔÛÈÊ×ÛÉÍÎûÊ×Å×ÓÕÎÍÊÓÎÕÈÔ× Î××ØÉÍÖÚÓÙÃÙÐÓÉÈÉÌ×Ø×ÉÈÊÓÛÎÉÛÎØÙÔÓÐØÊ×ÎýíÖÙÍÇÊÉ×ÎÍÈ íÇÊÕÍÛÐÉÔÛÆ×ÛÐÅÛÃÉÓÎÙÐÇØ×ØÉÛÖ×ÈÃÉÇÉÈÛÓÎÛÚÓÐÓÈÃÛÎØÎ×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØ×ÏÌÍÅ×ÊÏ×ÎÈíÇÊ ÌÊÍÙ×ÉÉÛÈ×Æ×ÊÃÉÈ×ÌÔÛÉ×ÄÌÐÍÊ×ØÛÎØÇÈÓÐÓÂ×ØÈÔ×É×ÙÍÎÙ×ÌÈÉÓÎÍÇÊÖÓÎÛÐØ×ÙÓÉÓÍÎÉå×ÔÛÆ× Ú××ÎÍÌ×ÎÈÍÍÇÈÉÓØ×ÓÎÌÇÈûÐÐÔÛÉÚ××ÎÙÍÎÉÓØ×Ê×ØÓÎÛÔÍÐÓÉÈÓÙÅÛÃôÍÐÓÉÏÐÓÑ×ùÍÎÈ×ÄÈ é×ÎÉÓÈÓÆ×éÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÉØÍ×ÉÎÍÈÛÐÅÛÃÉÌÊÍÆÓØ××Æ×ÊÃÈÔÓÎÕÖÍÊ×Æ×ÊÃÍÎ× ÈÔÓÉÈÅÍÃ×ÛÊÌÊÍÙ×ÉÉÔÛÉÚ××ÎÛÎ×Ã×ÍÌ×Î×ÊÖÍÊÛÐÐÍÖÇÉíÎ×ÈÔÓÎÕÈÔÛÈÉÈÛÎØÉÍÇÈÓÉ ÈÔÓÉ×ÎÕÓÎ××ÊÓÎÕÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉÓÎÈÔÓÉÙÓÈÃÛÊ×Æ×ÊÃÎÛÊÊÍÅÓÎÉÙÍÌ×ÛÎØÛÌÌ×ÛÊÈÍÓÕÎÍÊ×ÍÚÆÓÍÇÉ ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÉÉÓÏÌÐÃÚ×ÙÛÇÉ×ÈÔ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÓÉÌÛÊÈÍÖÛÎÍÈÔ×ÊÕÍÆ×ÊÎÏ×ÎÈÛÐ×ÎÈÓÈÃÍÊÖÛÐÐÉÅÓÈÔÓÎÈÔ× ÌÇÊÆÓ×ÅÍÖ×ÄÈ×ÊÎÛÐÊ×ÕÇÐÛÈÓÍÎÉÈÔÛÈÔÛÆ×ÐÓÈÈÐ×ÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈÓÍÎÈÍÈÔ×Î××ØÉÛÈÔÛÎØéÓÏÌÐ×ÉÍÐÇÈÓÍÎÉ ÈÍØ×ÉÓÕÎÓÉÉÇ×ÉÛÊ×ÍÖÈ×ÎÙÐ×ÛÊÈÍÛÐÐÚÇÈÙÛÎtÈÚ×ÓÏÌÐ×Ï×ÎÈ×ØÚ×ÙÛÇÉ×ÍÖÒÇÊÓÉØÓÙÈÓÍÎÛÐ ÖÓ×ÖØÍÏÉ èÔÓÉÓÉÌÛÊÈÓÙÇÐÛÊÐÃÈÊÇ×ÍÖÈÔ×ÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÓÉÉÇ×ùÓÈÃÌÐÛÎÉÖÊÍÏØ×ÙÛØ×ÉÛÕÍÉÔÍÅÊÓÕÔÈÍÖÅÛÃÉ ÛÎØÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈÍÊÉÖÍÊÖÇÈÇÊ×ÚÓÑ×ÅÛÃÉÈÔÊÍÇÕÔÈÔ×Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØèÔ×øÊÛÖÈðùíõïÛÉÈ×ÊìÐÛÎ Ø×ÐÓÎ×ÛÈ×ÉÛÎÓÎÈ×ÕÊÛÈ×ØÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÊÍÇÈ×ÈÔÊÍÇÕÔÈÔ×Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØèÔ×øÊÛÖÈïÍÊÉ×êÛÎÙÔïÛÉÈ×Ê ìÐÛÎÉÔÍÅÉÛÎÛÐÐÏÍØ×ÉÌÛÈÔÙÍÎÎ×ÙÈÓÎÕÐÍÙÛÐÉÈÊ××ÈÉÌ×Î×ÈÊÛÈÓÎÕÈÔ×ÛÙÊ×ÉÍÖÍÌ×ÎÉÌÛÙ× îÍÎ×ÍÖÈÔ×É×ÌÐÛÎÉÉÔÍÅØ×ØÓÙÛÈ×ØÚÓÑ×ÐÛÎ×ÉÍÎÈÔ×ÏÛÒÍÊÉÈÊ××ÈÉèÔ×Ê×ÓÉÉÍÏÇÙÔÅ×ÙÛÎØÍ ÈÍÓÎÉÇÊ×ÚÓÙÃÙÐÓÉÈÉÔÛÆ×ÛÉÛÖ×ÅÛÃÈÔÊÍÇÕÔÈÔ×Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØ óÈÏÛÑ×ÉÏÍÊ×É×ÎÉ×ÈÍÇÉÈÔÛÈ ÈÔ×ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÛÉÑÈÔ×÷úùÈÍÅÍÊÑÅÓÈÔùÊ×ÉÈøÊÓÆ×Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÉÓÎÛÒÍÓÎÈ×ÖÖÍÊÈÈÍÏÛÑ×ÈÔ×É× èÔ×É×Ø×ÉÓÕÎÉÅÓÐÐÌÊÍÆÓØ×ÖÍÊÛÉÛÖ× ÛÐÊ×ÛØÃÛÊÈÓÙÇÐÛÈ×ØÚÓÑ×ÌÛÈÔØ×ÉÓÕÎÉÛÊ×ÛÐÓÈÃ Ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐÌÛÈÔÈÔÊÍÇÕÔÈÔ×Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØÌÛÈÔÉÈÔÛÈÙÛÎÚ×ÇÉ×ØÚÃÙÔÓÐØÊ×ÎÛÉÅ×ÐÐÛÉ Ê×ÙÊ×ÛÈÓÍÎÛÐÛÎØ×ÐÓÈ×ÙÃÙÐÓÉÈÉ çÐÈÓÏÛÈ×ÐÃÅ×Ê×ÛÐÓÂ×ÈÔÛÈÍÇÊÅÍÊÑÓÉÔÛÊØÐÃØÍÎ×óÖÃÍÇÛÌÌÊÍÆ×ÈÔ×Ø×ÉÓÕÎÛÉÓÈÔÛÉÚ××Î ÌÊ×É×ÎÈ×ØÈÍÃÍÇÛÎØÅ×ÇÊÕ×ÃÍÇÈÍØÍÉÍÅ×ÅÓÐÐÙÍÎÈÓÎÇ×ÈÍÏÍÎÓÈÍÊÈÔ×ÙÍÏÌÐ×ÈÓÍÎÍÖÈÔ× ÍÆ×ÊÛÐÐØ×ÉÓÕÎÅÔÓÐ×ÅÍÊÑÓÎÕÓÎÈÔ×ÉÇÚÙÍÏÏÓÈÈ××ÉÍÇÈÐÓÎ×ØÓÎÍÇÊÐ×ÈÈ×ÊÍÖö×ÚÊÇÛÊÃ óÖÃÍÇÉÔÍÇÐØÙÔÍÍÉ×ÈÍÛÐÈ×ÊÈÔ×Ø×ÉÓÕÎÌÊ×É×ÎÈ×ØÚÃÛÉÑÓÎÕÖÍÊÛÚÓÙÃÙÐ×ÐÛÎ×ÈÔÊÍÇÕÔÍÇÈÈÔ× ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÍÎÈÔ×ÇÌÔÓÐÐÉÓØ×ÍÖÈÔ×ÊÍÛØÓÈÓÉØÓÖÖÓÙÇÐÈÈÍÓÏÛÕÓÎ×ÈÔÛÈÃÍÇÅÓÐÐÖÓÎØÙÓÈÓÂ×ÎÉÅÓÐÐÓÎÕ ÈÍÙÍÎÈÓÎÇ×ÈÍÅÍÊÑÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ùÓÈÃÑÎÍÅÓÎÕÈÔÛÈÈÔ×ÖÊÇÓÈÍÖÈÔ×ÓÊÐÛÚÍÊÙÍÇÐØÚ×ØÓÉÙÛÊØ×ØÛÈÛÎÃ ÏÍÏ×ÎÈå×ÛÉÑÃÍÇÈÍÙÍÎÉÓØ×ÊÅÔÛÈÛÊ×Ò×ÙÈÓÍÎÍÖÍÇÊØ×ÉÓÕÎÅÓÐÐÏ×ÛÎÓÎÈ×ÊÏÉÍÖùÍÇÎÙÓÐ ÙÊ×ØÓÚÓÐÓÈÃÛÎØÈÔ×ùÍÇÎÙÓÐÕÍÛÐÍÎÎ×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØ×ÏÌÍÅ×ÊÏ×ÎÈ Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony Received 2/14/08 to 4/8/08 The following collection of emails were received by City staff between February 14, 2008 and April 8, 2008. This is a comprehensive collection of written testimony received via email during the time immediately preceding and following the February 19, 2008 public hearing on the Crest CSS concept design. From: Paul Moore [mailto:paulcmoore@pacinfo.com] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 8:00 AM To: ZELENKA Alan (SMTP); *Eugene Mayor and City Council Cc: Amy Clark; DINGMAN Corey (SMTP); Teresa Dingman Subject: Re(2): Bike path Hello, Thanks for all the words below which suggest putting some serious attention on revising the Crest area road design in order to safely and, in the spirit of Transplan Goal 2, effectively accommodate bicyclists. Cory Dingman was the third person who spoke at the Mayor's one-on-one a couple weeks ago. He and Teresa Dingman, who also spoke in favor of road space for bicyclists at a CDCT design committee meeting last June, live on Mary Lane near Morse Ranch along with their young child. Although 'advocates for bicycling', as Mayor Piercy points out, Amy, Corey and Teresa come to that distinction honestly by simply wanting equal access to their residences by bicycle for their children and themselves. Paul, who lived on Mary Lane for over two years in the early 90's has a hand-earned understanding of the shortcomings of the current roads there and of the current design for new roads. Paul 2/14/08 Hi David Roth, I have looked at these plans at various times & places--the Amazon Comm. Center event, some Crest Neighborhood meetings. They are looking very good! I walk in this area a lot and every day I look forward to having some sidewalks and safer places so I don't have to step into the ditch when cars go by. I checked through the maps to see the zig-zagging bike path I have been reading about in some e-mails, and was pleased to find that it doesn't zig-zag. I found one place where it switches sides, but that seems very reasonable. Again, I want to state that I look forward to these improvements and am very pleased that few trees are slated to be cut and that the rural feel of the neighborhood will be retained as much as possible, while making it safer for bikers and pedestrians. Thanks, Cecelia Hagen - 1 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 -----Original Message----- From: Service Request Form [mailto:servicerequestform@ci.eugene.or.us] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 1:41 PM To: Eugene PSO Subject: Service Request from the web site. First Name : Robert Last Name : Hutchings Email Address : rhutchings@lanepds.org Street Address : 515 Ful Vue City, State, Zip : 97405 Daytime Telephone : Type of Request : General Comment Resident Type : Resident Message : Please forwar to Betty Taylor, her email came back to me. Dear Ms. Taylor, It was great talking with you today at the DAC. I came away from our discussion feeling like you had an excellent understanding of the conflict. Please read this article I think you will find it persuasive for a up hill bike lane. The bottom line for the property owners is about $$$$$$$. What is the difference in the cost per home owner for the changes? There are many numerous options, what is least the expensive option that takes into account the necessity of an up hill bike lane? Any way here's the article. Thanks again for your careful consideration. Bob Hutchings Link to Article: http://bikeportland.org/2008/02/13/bikes-on-sidewalks-could-washington-county- be-held-liable-in-tragedy/ From: Sue Wolling [mailto:bicycle@efn.org] Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 10:46 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Drive Plans Inadequate Dear Eugene City Council, Please do not adopt the current plans for road improvements in the Crest Drive neighborhood unless those plans are modified to include an uphill bike lane or other specific designated space for bicycling. In a process like the Context-Sensitive Design approach which produced the plans for the Crest neighborhood, it is perhaps inevitable that the residents involved will express their private hopes and desires for the streets they live on. It falls to the City Council to evaluate whether those plans serve the public interest. The streets of the Crest Drive neighborhood serve not only current property owners on the major streets, but also those who live on the side streets, those from surrounding neighborhoods, and those who might move into the area in the future. Throughout the long process that resulted in the Crest Drive plans, bicyclists have spoken of the need for designated space on the uphill side of the roads for bicyclists. They have suggested a variety of approaches that could provide safety of bicyclists with minimal impact on street width, cost, or other neighborhood values. Unfortunately, these recommendations fell on deaf ears. The result is that for the first time in decades, Eugene is contemplating investing public money to build streets that offer no safe access for bicyclists and only sporadic and inconvenient access for pedestrians. The combination of narrow, curvy streets and steep hills make the proposed design unsafe for bicyclists. Even an experienced, well-trained cyclist will travel significantly more slowly - 2 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 than motorists while riding uphill, and cannot “share the lane” comfortably. But not everyone who might want to ride a bike in the neighborhood is an experienced, well-trained cyclist. Many bicyclists will start pedaling up a hill, and then have to get off and walk. Do you really want someone walking a bicycle up a hill in a travel lane that is only nine feet wide? This is clearly an unsafe design. Please do not allow your weariness with the Crest Drive street process guide your decision. This project represents a significant investment in infrastructure that will remain in place for at least 50 years, and will serve both current and future residents. Public safety is not simply a design option—it is the minimum that is required, and the proposed Crest Drive plans do not provide safe conditions for bicyclists. Sincerely, Sue Wolling 85219 S. Willamette Eugene OR 97405 From: stan kluth [mailto:kluth2@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 2:00 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Cc: ctreadway@hotmail.com; monikakluth@yahoo.com Subject: 19 February Public Hearing on Crest Drive Street Design Subject: 19 February 2008 Public Input on the Crest Drive Community Team street designs As I will be out of the country and unable to personally attend the 19 February City Council public hearing on the Crest Drive Community Team preliminary street design proposals, I wish to submit my comments for the public record in writing. I strongly recommend to Council that the long hard work of the CDCT in hammering out a design acceptable to the majority of the residents be accepted, including the desire to limit sidewalk width to 4 feet where appropriate. While there may still be in my opinion highly selfish individual residents who object to anything but their own personal wishes, as well as individual non-residents who wish to impose their will on those of us who are residents, the majority of the neighborhood has seen, commented and approved the proposal as meeting the desire for a context sensitive design solution. While these NIMBYS may be highly vocal and prolific in their correspondence and protests against the designs, the designs do represent the consensus of the majority of residents. I should also like to note that the Crest Drive Community Association also voted overwhelmingly to support the designs and the sidewalk width on 12 February 2008. Before proceeding forward from the preliminary design to final design completion, however, I would like to request the following from Council and City Staff: 1.Prior to any decision on a classification for the streets – particularly Friendly from 28th to Lorane Highway, that a new traffic count be completed to determine the actual volume of vehicles which use it daily. When the initial plan to classify the streets as neighborhood collectors was prepared nearly 5 years ago, the traffic count was significantly higher that it is today. The majority of the traffic recorded. Particularly through traffic , was to visit a Eugene institution, Flics and Pics, which to all our regret has since closed. Since the departure of Flics and - 3 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Pic’s in 2007, traffic flow on Friendly has decreased to a trickle of what it formerly was – typically a moderate volume during morning and evening rush hours on weekdays from local residents, and other wise a few delivery vehicles and minimal car traffic during the remainder on weekdays and on weekends. Since Flics and Pics will never come again, and no major expansion of the urban growth boundary to the south is possible, this decreased traffic flow will become the norm for the future. Thus the premise for classifying the streets as collectors as since been eliminated. 2 . When considering what construction measures are needed to repair the streets, a thorough study of the existing roadbed should be undertaken. While I am no civil engineer, I can see that despite over 30 years of total neglect in city maintenance since the streets were assumed from the county, they are still in better condition, even with the existing potholes, that many city streets which need to be completely repaired every 3-5 years – look at Chambers and 18th as examples. It appears that the county roadbed is not only adequate but sturdier that that which exists on most city streets. It would likely save a huge amount of money and simplify repairs if all that is needed is a good resurfacing, rather than massive excavation to replace an already sound substructure. To say nothing of the problems with water, sewer, gas and other utilities, disruption of the root structures of roadside trees, and disturbance of the underlying soil which could result in significant slippage given the clay layers and underground water seepage we experience already outside the streets. 3. Finally, after consulting with my home owners insurance, I was informed that any changes in the hillside stability in the neighborhood caused by excavation, removal of large trees, diversion of runoff water, etc, which resulted in slides would not be covered by homeowner insurance, but that the city would be liable. City liability would only be given, however, if the City had been served notice to this effect. I therefore herewith also use this forum to serve notice that should any such slides occur, I will hold the city liable for damages to my property. In closing, I wish to extend my deepest thanks to all those neighbors who dedicated their time and effort to work with city staff to achieve the preliminary design being presented to City Council on 19 February, and most sincerely hope that Council will reward those efforts by approving the designs. Sincerely Stan Kluth 2830 Friendly St. Eugene From: Ted Selker [mailto:selker@media.mit.edu] Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 7:58 PM To: Eric Selker Cc: Betty Taylor Subject: Re: to Betty Taylor (et al) re Crest Dr. improvements Not to intrude too much from my palo alto perspective but.... i am a shoulder enthusiast, they make cars and bikes safer by giving everyone a way to get out of each others way and creating a breakdown lane. a compromise could be an extra wide "paved path" without a sharp curb, this is done many places, instead of a curb, a trough that can be used as a gutter, a ramp to a driveway and CLEARLY separates traffic might make everyones interests work, it allows a bike to gracefully leave or enter the path without navigating or falling on a curb, it allows people to leave the road here is approximently what they look like all over Palo - 4 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Alto streetsidewalk or driveway These are a cement peice about 24 inches wide, i am shure the same shape could be formed cheeper from asphault than cast cement but it would be hard to make it uniform p. s. i am not sure if this solves Erics issues, but it does at least make sidewalks much safer for mixed use, and reduces redo when curbcuts change. pss. how can any road improvement cost landowners $20k per 100 feet of frontage? pss. i have an idea that i would like to see tried that would make you NEVER have to dig when utilities change, that i would love to present. + Ted Selker, Associate Professor, MIT Media Lab + Director Context Aware Computing Group E15-322 20 Ames St., Cambridge MA, USA 02139 http://www.media.mit.edu/~selker selker@media.mit.edu + office 617-253-6968, h 6503835079, + From: Kevin Knode [mailto:kevin@kipcoinc.net] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 8:26 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Drive City Representatives, I am writing as a property owner on Crest Drive. I own 3.6 acres on the south side of Crest Dr. opposite Wills Court. In the past two years, I have been working with the City on an infill development project known as Crest Meadows PUD. Although lengthy in process time, I am confident the design solution met the satisfaction of the Neighborhood Association, City planners, and developers on behalf of the future home owners who desire to live in south Eugene. The challenging problem of the improvements to Crest Dr. you are currently discussing is an issue with me and many of the neighbors I have spoken with as we worked on the site. Being a road builder by trade and having to negotiate the existing narrow streets with trucks as we work in the area is just plain not safe! Add bicycles to the mix and you have a disaster waiting to happen. Make the road even narrower, and it becomes a liability. When we began our design of Crest Meadows, the City required us to improve our frontage of Crest Drive for a 27 foot wide street which allowed for a bike lane and some parking. There is an existing 60 foot right of way owned by the City where Crest Dr. runs and that makes sense. Being this is the City of bikes, and this is the major access route from the south west into downtown, providing for bike travel was a "no brainer". However, this was then changed to a 21 fooot street and they elimenated the bike lane and parking. This was then changed again to add back parking (all changes required by the City Public Works Dept.), and the design was - 5 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 approved. Not the best, but acceptable, so we proceeded. Now, with the current council recomendation of an 18 foot street, I want to go an record and say this is a mistake and not what I want, not what the neighbors I have talked to want, and I expect, not what the future home owners will want. In Eugene, they want bike lanes, bus turnouts, and safe access to and from their homes to town and Wayne Morse Ranch and Lafferty Park. They don't want to face a bus in the wrong lane because the road is too narrow. As a property owner, I expect to pay for these improvements, but to pay for a substandard street is a slap in the face. Thank you for your consideration. Kevin A. Knode Member, Rushmore Group LLC (541) 689-9265 Office (541) 729-8888 Cell From: Mayes, Guy Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 2:20 PM To: 'david.f.roth@ci.eugene.or.us' Subject: Feb 19, 2008 public hearing David, I am not able to attend the Feb 19 Public Hearing on minimum sidewalk widths, however, I would like to provide input for the decision process. I feel that user friendly sidewalks are very important for community livability. Sidewalks provide a key function for non-motorized accessibility and neighborhood cohesiveness. With adequate sidewalks pedestrians can gain physical exercise; run errands without using a vehicle; visit neighbors; and walk with others. Sidewalks allow children to visit friends and local stores without the need for transport by car. Families with young children and strollers need sidewalk space adequate to navigate without obstacles. Pedestrians should have enough space to comfortably walk side by side with another person. I do NOT feel that 4 foot wide sidewalks are adequate for a user friendly environment as outlined above, and I strongly urge that a minimum width of 5 feet (or greater) be retained. Please contact me at 541-917-7640 if you have questions. Guy Mayes 2820 Chambers Street Eugene, OR 97405 From: Jen Matthews [mailto:jmatt33@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 9:30 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: bicycles on Crest area streets Dear Council and Mayor Piercy, I am a Crest neighborhood resident and am concerned that the currently proposed street design is unsafe for bicycles. Having a network of bike lanes is something Eugene is known for and omitting this from the Crest area streets will be a step backwards in the City's sustainability goals. - 6 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 very best, Jen Matthews 450 Fulvue Dr. Eugene, OR 97405 541-915-1875 jmatt33@comcast.net From: Curt Lind [mailto:curtlind@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 10:59 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Cycling and Crest Drive Honorable Mayor and City Council, I am a year round bicycle commuter between south Eugene and downtown. I started this commute by bike about ten years ago and do it daily except in ice and snow. It has come to my attention that the road improvements to Crest Drive may result in a "narrow" street that does not include a bike lane. I think this is a mistake and it seems to run counter to most other city transportation priorities. While I don't suggest that we should develop streets that are so wide that they enable faster auto transit, making the streets so narrow that bikes must integrate with cars and trucks or pedestrians on the sidewalk is unwise and very unsafe. I am particularly concerned with cyclist going slowly uphill and inexperienced riders (small?) on the streets. I am not well informed of the community process that has brought this specific proposal forward, but the notion that a select group of residents can have this impact on the safety of other residents and nonresidents in the larger community is inconsistent with Eugene's transportation policies and culture. This just doesn't make sense to me. I urge you to approve a street development plan for Crest Drive that will accommodate bicycles in appropriately marked lanes. A narrow street with no bike lanes is not the way to go. Best regards, Curt Lind 2375 Bailey Hill Road 97405 2/19/08 Dear Eugene City Council and Mayor Piercy, I am a developmental and behavioral pediatrician who lived at 3345 Storey Blvd from 1993-2004 while at the OHSU Child Development and Rehabilitation Center on UofO's campus, during which I was a vocal advocate for Crest Drive Citizens' pedestrian and alternative transportation options. On at least 3 occasions LTD agreed to continue 22 bus service to downtown instead of the school bus only option to South Eugene High School, in part due to my neighborhood organizing. One of our main arguments was the more that people used bus and biking combinations, the fewer cars there would be to clog our streets. - 7 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Yes, I was a dedicated bicycle commuter, up the hill from Morse Ranch Park! My three children were bicyclists and bus riders as well, none of them getting their drivers' licenses until after they turned 20. The narrow streets were not ideal for biking, but were doable in part because they did not have curbs. However, I saw too many close calls from speeding cars trying to pass going downhill and not looking out for pedestrians and their dogs who also had to share the edges. I am writing to express my deep disappointment with the majority of my old neighbors who are shortsightedly thinking since they drive that they only need to preserve the driving option. I had excitedly embraced the Context Sensitive Design approach before I moved, as I thought it would allow the neighborhood to keep from being "FoxHollowized," while making the neighborhood safer for elementary kids biking and walking to Crest School, for older kids and parents biking and walking to Market of Choice, Roosevelt, South, LCC/UofO, or their jobs, or for recreational dog walkers and bicyclists going up past the TV towers on Blanton Road. I wrote multiple letters before and during the process suggesting a rolling curb and sidewalk on the uphill side as likely having the narrowest impact on the neigborhood. That would allow traffic calming by bicyclists on the downhill, but allow the too slow up-hillers to do what is safest depending on car and sidewalk activity. I now see that giving my neighbors too much power meant minority interests got trampled. That is where a compromise between city standards and neighborhood desires MUST preserve everyone's best interest. Narrow streets with curbs will be unsafe and un-ridable. Confining bikes to a sidewalk mean people won't ride. The only thing worse than walking up the hill is pushing a bike, that is not why people ride, and they won't. Especially if there is a pedestrian with a dog, an uphill biker will have to stop and will not be able to restart, the hills are too steep to do so. Having to cross streets with a sidewalk on the downhill side is even more dangerous, as bicyclists will be tempted to ride down the sidewalk, which will put pedestrians, their dogs, and uphill bicyclists in danger. Please send this proposal back to find a compromise that is good for the whole neighborhood, not just the drivers. Sincerely, Richard B Coolman MD, MPH Director, KidScope Assessment Center for Developmental & Behavioral Health, Departments of Pediatrics & Mental Health, Santa Clara Valley Health & Hospital System, San Jose CA rbentscool@yahoo.com 408-793-4253w, 408-979-0436h, 408-7935955fax From: Corey Dingman [mailto:corey@duncanbrown.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 11:50 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Drive Mayor and City Council, I am writing you concerning the CDCT's Crest Drive Design Concept. I live in the Crest Drive Neighborhood, I have a young child, I walk in the neighborhood and sometimes ride my bike to work. The proposed plan is not safe for pedestrians or cyclists and is not representative of what most of the neighborhood wants. My neighbors and I have been voicing our concerns about this proposal to CDCT members as well as city staff since the first proposed design was made public. We have been told by city staff and committee members that it is too late to change now even though we have voiced serious concerns immediately after the plans were made public. We have been told by committee members at the Amazon Community Center open house that it is not "our" street and that because we wont have to pay assessments we shouldn't get to decide on - 8 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 the plan. It is clear that the CDCT has designed a street that is optimal only for those who have property on these streets. However, the proposed plan does not address the needs of the rest of the neighborhood. It is no surprise that over 90% of the committee members that devised this plan have property with frontage on the affected streets, or that the committee was appointed by the similar "transportation subcommittee of the CDNA'. I cannot blame them for the recommendations they have made, however, this road is an investment by the city and should represent the stated values of the city and neighborhood as well as a vision for the future. We all feel that the property owners most affected should have the most input into what will be built in front of their houses. But to allow this group to design streets that are unsafe is a liability to the city and a danger to those of us that will continue to use them. These streets are the only connection to the city for much of this neighborhood and it is critical that it be designed in a way that is safe for pedestrians and cyclists, and encourages modes of transportation other than cars. We hope for a neighborhood where our kids can ride their bikes to school and we can all walk on the sidewalks in safety. Sincerely, Corey Dingman 575 Fulvue Drive Eugene From: Cecelia Hagen [mailto:cecelia_hagen@ous.edu] Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 1:19 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: re: Crest Drive street development Dear Mayor Piercy and Councilors: I am writing as a resident of the Crest Neighborhood area, one who does not live on a street directly affected by the street plan under discussion tonight, but who typically walks those streets once or twice a day. I support the plan under consideration and do not feel there is sufficient need to widen the streets beyond the proposed size or to install a dedicated bike lane. I can understand the dangers of bikers and pedestrians sharing a sidewalk on a busy street, such as 18th Avenue (where I sometimes bicycle). However, Crest, Story, and the other streets in the plan are quite steep at times and I seldom see bicycles on them. Lorane Highway, which is also a considerable hill, is much less steep, and bikers use Lorane often. Wider streets will invite faster car speeds, which will pose a danger to pedestrians and bikers, as well as to wildlife. Wider streets and more pavement would be out of character for this historic and generally rural-feeling section of town. I would urge anyone, before they vote to put in a dedicated bike lane, to walk or bike the area under consideration, and see whether they still feel the need to add more pavement. Thanks for your time, Cecelia Hagen 2972 Madison St. Eugene, OR 97405 - 9 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 From: Richard Hughes [mailto:hughes97405@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 7:16 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest,Storey and Friendly Street Design Honorable Mayor and City Councilors, This is in regard to the Crest,Storey and Friendly Street Design currently scheduled for council action on April 14. I live in the Crest Drive neighborhood at 3464 Olive Street.I travel Crest Drive daily by bicycle. Currently, as you know, the road surface contains numerous potholes which serves to slow traffic.Also there are no center medians or curbs,so if I'm biking one of these streets and a motor vehicle wants to pass me,they merely go around me by crossing over into the oncoming lane when it is safe to do so. Under the recommended design by the Crest Drive Citizens Team, all streets would be nine feet wide with a center median and curb.Bicyclists traveling a road of this width should ride in the center of the lane to prevent motorists from passing them when there isn't enough room for the motor vehicle to pass.This is according to ODOT's Bicycle Manual. Also I am a cycling instructor,certified by the the League of American Bicyclists and concur that cyclists need to ride in the center of a lane when that lane is too narrow for both the cyclist and the motor vehicle. As you can imagine,a cyclist traveling at four to five MPH uphill with anxious motor vehicle drivers closely following without the ability to pass(due to center medians and curbs) is an unsafe situation. I would like to see the streets improved and the neighborhood retain its rural appeal,but not at the cost of someone being injured or killed. I recommend adding a bicycle lane to the current street design. Very truly yours, Richard Hughes P.O. Box 5506 3464 Olive St. Eugene, OR 97405 541-683-1409 From: lyndell wilken [mailto:lwbicycle@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:11 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Cc: Sue Wolling; Paul C Moore; Richard Hughes; Gary Rayor Subject: Crest Drive Redesign Dear Mayor and Council Members: As the bike and pedestrian representative on the CDCT I feel it is my responsibility to encourage you to look hard and long at the existing Crest Drive plans. There was not enough consideration given to bicyclists during this process. Given the overwhelming voting power of those living on the streets it was impossible to adequately represent other user groups of the Crest streets. It is now the councils responsibility to represent other user groups of the Crest neighborhood streets and bring a balanced approach to this decision making process. It is understandable given the fee assessment guidelines for those living along the streets that - 10 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 bicycle and pedestrian interests would be pushed to the back. The council needs to tackle this problem of how people are assessed if they want our older neighborhoods to be user friendly for non-motorized methods of transport. I am hoping you have read the alternative proposal submitted by Gary Rayor at the last council meeting. As the past council representative from our area Gary understands the needs of our neighborhood. Ultimately, we would like to have a 5 foot uphill bike lane but realize a compromise might be necessary and I believe Gary's plan offers such a compromise. I would also encourage each member of the council to walk up Lower Crest drive by Wayne Morris Ranch before making your decision. At the top look down towards the bottom of the hill and watch the cars, trucks and buses moving up the narrow lanes and picture a bicycle in that same lane. Sincerely; Lyndell Wilken 3065 Whitbeck Blvd. CDCT Bike and Pedestrian Representative From: Alec Bentley [mailto:alecbentley@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 11:10 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Bike Lanes Dear Mayor Piercy and the Eugene City Council, I urge you with all of my love for Eugene to include bike lanes as part of the street improvement program for the Morse Ranch area of our beautiful City. I am confident that any cost benefit / value analysis would demonstrate that bike lanes are good value as they will enhance the lives of all residents and visitors to Eugene in many ways. Bike lanes will encourage residents and visitors of all ages to ride bikes rather than take some form of motorized transportation. This will lower pollution, facilitate quieter neighborhoods, help to improve the physical and mental health of the riders, cause less delays for motorists. Perhaps most importantly it will reduce the number of accidents between vehicles' and bike riders. The major reason most potential bike riders choose to take motorized transportation rather than ride their bike is their concern for their own or their children's safety. The more safe bike routes that are available to and from a planned destinations the more people will use their bikes. Please find a way to include at least uphill bike lanes in the Morse Ranch area and please continue to increase the miles of bike lanes in Eugene at the fastest possible rate. Thank you for your consideration for the expansion of bike lanes throughout Eugene. Alec Bentley Eugene From: Sara Burant [mailto:kitsatoo@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 2:09 PM - 11 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Cc: TAYLOR Betty L Subject: bike lane and walkable sidewalks on Friendly/Crest Drive Dear Mayor Piercy and Councilors, As a resident of the Friendly Street/Crest Drive neighborhood and a cyclist and walker who uses the streets in question (Friendly, Storey and Crest), I hope you will wholeheartedly and unreservedly push for the inclusion of an uphill bike lane as the re-design of those streets reaches its final stages. In addition, I hope you will urge the inclusion of a contiguous sidewalk as the design goes forward. If this community wishes to promote alternative transportation, especially in the face of global climate change and the realities imposed by peak oil, we must begin now by incorporating safe routes for walkers and cyclists on ALL street improvements. If bicycle lanes and contiguous sidewalks are made the norm, then I believe more people will choose to bicycle and walk. Without basic safety measures, people simply won't take a chance. We have to do all we can to nudge folks onto their bicycles and out to the streets. I should think you would feel it is your civic duty to look to the future, in this case a future wherein more people get out of their cars, and take a proactive stance where bike lanes and sidewalks are concerned. Thank you for your time, Sara Burant 3059 Whitbeck Blvd. From: Sara Burant [mailto:kitsatoo@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 11:49 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest/Friendly/Storey re-design Dear Kitty, Thank for your your prompt reply to my recent email concerning a bike lane on the proposed improvements to the Crest/Friendly/Storey corridor. Below I've pasted in a reply I sent this morning to the response I received from Betty Taylor, my neighborhood's council representative. The more I think about this issue, the more I've come to believe that what is at stake here is a re- imagining of neighborhood. It is not merely a question of alternative versus conventional transportation. It would be a shame if, a year or two or even ten down the road, the city wished it had been a bit more forward thinking in its concept for these street improvements--a sentiment which, given this city's history of ill-conceived changes, is all too likely to be felt. Thank you again for your willingness to look at all sides. Sara Burant Dear Councilor Taylor, - 12 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Thank you for your prompt reply. Of course I'm aware that you have been a proponent of alternative transportation throughout your career on the City Council, which is why it surprises me that in this case you are not fully on board with a bike lane. As to neighborhood protection, having experienced recently here on Whitbeck Blvd. a huge change in the character of our little neighborhood when three houses were built on a lot three years ago, a change which we attempted to fight (with your very gracious help), I understand the motivation for such concern. And yet I've come to understand as well that change is good, that the character of neighborhoods lies more in the congeniality between neighbors than in outward appearances. Perhaps the inclusion of a contiguous sidewalk and a bike lane in the Friendly/Crest/Storey neighborhoods would in fact promote more neighborliness as folks would feel more comfortable getting out, walking, biking and getting to know their neighbors--both those who live near and those who would come from a bit further off were the neighborhood made more accessible. Thank you again for your time and for your willingness to listen to all points of view. Sara Burant From: hbonnett@comcast.net [mailto:hbonnett@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 8:39 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: not Crest again! Dear Mayor Piercy and City Councilors, The Crest, Friendly, and Storey Blvd street improvements need to be re-examined in order to work out some compromise that will at least partially support safe pedestrian and bicycle trips. Friendly St. is a good bicycle connector to Lorane Highway, but 9-foot lanes and one sidewalk on the downhill side are not suitable. Bicycle riders going uphill need a bicycle lane, and the sidewalk should be on the uphill side in case they need to walk part of the way. Sidewalks separated from 9-foot travel lanes by nothing more than a curb are scary when large vehicles, wide vehicles, noisy vehicles, and speeding vehicles rush by closely. If only one sidewalk is to be provided, then it should be separated from the street by a planting strip. The neighbors state that a narrow streetscape reduces speed and I agree, but a narrow streetscape can also be achieved by the striping of bike lanes and by separating the sidewalk from the travel lanes in order to have low vegetation close in to the travel lanes. Agate Street from 18th to 24th is a street with bicycle lanes on both sides, with parking on one side, and with planting strips separating pavement from sidewalks. When Agate Street was reconfigured in this manner, the average speed of the car traffic dropped significantly due to a narrow looking streetscape and narrow travel lanes. Significant lengths of Crest Drive as it goes uphill past Morse Ranch and on also have the sidewalk on the downhill side and have no separation of the sidewalk from the downhill travel lane. Of course, the neighbors want the sidewalk on the side along their houses. Good for them, but not for travelers using bicycles, pedestrians walking along Morse Ranch, etc. According to testimony at your public hearing, a representative of the neighborhood stated that their planning group included a representative of the bicycling community throughout the process, as if that made their work acceptable. However, the bicycle representative, also a neighbor, stated she had voted a “1” on a scale of 1-5 on the completed plan, with “1” being completely unacceptable. Imagine the courage it took to try to stand up against a united front of neighbors who want even less than Eugene’s minimum required street improvement. - 13 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Street improvement projects such as these are constructed to last for decades, long past the time when we will have affordable fossil fuels to power a wasteful gasoline engine-driven transportation system. Future residents of the area will appreciate your support for alternative transportation, making it possible for them to live in this area and reach working, shopping, educating, and recreating destinations in some safety. Thank you, Howie Bonnett From: Amy [mailto:amyc@efn.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 2:33 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Safety... in the Crest Drive redesign HI Please read the following regarding the way, philosophy, knowledge, awareness that Congress is taking action for actual safe and creative ways to facilitate bicyclists. They are asking American communities to create safe, bike facilities instead of just verbally promoting/marketing bicycle/pedestrian...also Betty Taylor, please think again about your verbal and written comments suggesting that bicyclist riding through the Crest Drive neighborhood should ride in the middle of the road. Do you plan on posting signs suggesting and promoting all pedestrians and bicyclist to ride in the middle of the roads? Or new regulations allowing everyone to walk/ride in the middle of the expensive, inefficient...redesign and put their lives in danger. Again, this is an expensive redesign, please let all neighbors vote, it is very permanent, consider the fast pace of the changing times in regards to sustaining a safe and cleaner environment, health...less reliance on autos and gasoline, pollution. From: Amy [mailto:amyc@efn.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 6:29 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Drive redesign – Congress Complete Streets Act of 2008 (Introduced in Senate) S 2686 IS 110th CONGRESS 2d Session S. 2686 To ensure that all users of the transportation system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users as well as children, older individuals, and individuals with disabilities, are able to travel safely and conveniently on streets and highways. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES March 3, 2008 Mr. HARKIN (for himself and Mr. CARPER) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation - 14 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 A BILL To ensure that all users of the transportation system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users as well as children, older individuals, and individuals with disabilities, are able to travel safely and conveniently on streets and highways. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Complete Streets Act of 2008'. SEC. 2. SAFE AND COMPLETE STREETS. Section 133 of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: `(g) Complete Streets Policy- `(1) IN GENERAL- Beginning with the fiscal year that begins 2 years after the date of enactment of this subsection, States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations shall-- `(A) adopt an explicit statement of policy (that meets the requirements of subsection (b)) that the safety and convenience of all users of the transportation system shall be accommodated; `(B) apply such policy to the projects contained in the Transportation Improvement Program; and `(C) incorporate the principles in this policy into all aspects of the transportation project development process, including project identification, scoping procedures and design approvals, as well as design manuals and performance measures. `(2) PURPOSE- The purpose of the policy statement required under paragraph (1)(A) is to ensure that all users of the transportation system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users as well as children, older individuals, and individuals with disabilities, are able to travel safely and conveniently on streets and highways within the public right of way. `(h) Policy Statement Requirements- A policy statement under subsection (g)(1)(A) shall include the following: `(1) An assurance that all users of the transportation system will include pedestrians (including individuals of all ages, and individuals with disabilities (including mobility, sensory, neurological or hidden disabilities)), bicyclists, transit vehicles and users, and motorists. `(2) An assurance that the statement will apply to both new construction and reconstruction (including resurfacing, restoring, and rehabilitation (3R) projects) improvement projects. Simple improvements, such as re-striping for bicycle and pedestrian accommodation, may be encouraged in pavement resurfacing projects when they fall within the overall scope of the original roadwork. `(3) A clear procedure that requires approval by a senior manager of any specified exceptions from implementing the policy statement, including documentation with supporting data that indicates the basis for the exemption. `(4) A statement directing the use of the current design standards, including those standards applying to access for individuals with disabilities. `(5) A statement requiring that complete streets solutions be developed to fit in with the context of the community and that those solutions be flexible. - 15 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 `(6) A description of the performance standards with measurable outcomes that will be developed. `(7) A statement that accommodation shall be made for all users in all construction and improvement projects unless one or more of the following apply: `(A) The project involved a roadway on which non-motorized users are prohibited by law from using. In such case, a greater effort shall be made to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians elsewhere. `(B) The cost of establishing complete facilities would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use. `(C) With respect to a project area with a low population, other documented factors indicate an absence of need now and in the future. `(D) A Metropolitan Planning Organization or State department of transportation that is adopting complete streets policies may consult existing Federal guidance, including the 2000 USDOT Guidance document, `Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel'. `(E) The policy statement may be achieved through a State or local law or ordinance, or through an agency policy directive. `(i) Certifications- The Metropolitan Planning Organization and State department of transportation shall certify that each road project included in such plan has been reviewed for its compliance with any applicable policy statement under this section and that each project under such plan enhances the safety, convenience, and accessibility of the transportation system for all users to the extent that it is reasonably possible and that the project applicant addressed these concerns in the material prepared for public input with respect to such plan. A Metropolitan Planning Organization's implementation of its complete streets policy shall be a factor included in the review for the Metropolitan Planning Organization certification as provided for in section 134(5). `(j) Accessibility Standards- Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this subsection, the United States Access Board shall issue final standards for accessibility of new construction and alterations of pedestrian facilities in the public right-of-way. Until such time as the Access Board completes a final Public Right of Way Accessibility rule, Department of Transportation Standards for Accessible Transportation Facilities (49 C.F.R. 37.9, as amended on 10/30/2006 (71 FR 63263)) shall serve as the minimum standard. If the Department Of Transportation standards are silent or inapplicable with respect to any issue, the 2005 draft Public Right Of Way Accessibility Guidelines provisions shall be consulted. `(k) Inclusion of All Users- Metropolitan planning organizations and State departments of transportation shall strongly encourage local jurisdictions that are served by such organizations to maximize their efforts to include all users in their transportation planning. `(l) Additional Provisions- `(1) RESEARCH- `(A) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Transportation shall require the Federal Highway Administration to conduct complete streets research to assist States and Metropolitan Planning Organizations in developing, adopting, and implementing plans, projects, procedures, policies, and training that comply with the applicable statement of policy under subsection (g)(1)(A). `(B) PARTICIPATION- Research under subparagraph (A) shall be conducted with the participation of the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the American Public Transit Association, the American Planning Association, the National Association of Regional Councils, the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and representatives of the disability, motoring, bicycling, walking, transit user, aging, and other affected communities. `(C) EXISTING NEEDS- Research under subparagraph (A) shall be based on the existing statement of complete streets research needs as - 16 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 outlined by the Transportation Research Board in TR Circular E110, and shall also develop new areas of inquiry. `(2) BENCHMARKS AND GUIDANCE- The research project conducted under paragraph (1) shall be designed to result in the establishment of benchmarks and the provision of practical guidance on how to effectively implement street procedures and designs that will accommodate all types of users along the same facility or corridor including, vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and transit use. Such benchmarks and guidance shall focus on changing scoping, design, and construction procedures to more effectively fit the individual modes together into integrated facilities that meet the needs of each in an appropriate balance. Such benchmarks and guidance shall indicate the expected operational and safety performance of alternative approaches to facility design. `(3) BEST PRACTICES REPORT- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Federal Highway Administration shall publish a best practices report showing how transportation agencies have changed their procedures to routinely design safe, effective multi-modal facilities. In establishing such best practices, consideration shall be given to the following areas: `(A) Procedures for identifying the needs of the mix of users, including primary and secondary users that need to be served on various highway functional classes. `(B) The identification of the types and designs of facilities needed to serve each of those types of users. `(C) The identification of barriers to implementation as well as identification of costs associated with implementing complete streets policies. `(4) DATA COLLECTION- In addition to preparing the report under paragraph (3), the Federal Highway Administration shall work with the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the Federal Transit Association and appropriate Transportation Research Board committees on data collection, including a baseline non-motorized and transit use survey that will be integrated into the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the development of a survey tool for use by State transportation departments in identifying the multi-modal capacity of State and local road networks.'. From: Richard Hughes [mailto:hughes97405@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 5:12 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest,Storey and Friendly Street Design Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council, The City Council is currently scheduled to review/approve the Crest, Storey, and Friendly Street design on April 14. As proposed, the design does not contain a bike lane. As an avid biker and six year resident of the City, I believe it would be a great disservice to the people of Eugene for this project to be approved without the integration of a bike lane in the overall design. As you may be aware, on March 3, Senators Harkin and Carper introduced US Senate Bill 2686, known as the Complete Streets Act of 2008. A copy of the bill is pasted below for your reference. The very purpose of the Act "is to ensure that all users of the transportation system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users as well as children, older individuals, and individuals with disabilities, are able to travel safely and conveniently on streets and highways - 17 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 within the public right of way." (Emphasis added.) Although Senate Bill 2686 was only recently introduced, it does highlight the recognition of the federal government in designing roadway improvements that are holistic and encompass the needs of all users, not just motorists. The City Council has a unique opportunity here to ensure that the design of these streets now, and the remainder of the streets as improvements are necessary, take advantage of our environmentally-conscious culture and incorporates the use of all modes of transportation. Approving the design without incorporating the needs of all of Eugene's citizens is short sighted. I ask that you not approve the design project until such time as it is incorporates the needs of all of the City's residents. Very truly yours, Richard Hughes PO Box 5506 Eugene,OR 97405 From: Paul Adkins [mailto:adkins.p@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Paul Adkins Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 8:21 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Complete Streets for Crest Drive Dear Mayor Piercy and Members of the City Council, The City Council is scheduled to review the Crest Drive design on April 14. As proposed, the design does not contain a bike lane. As an transportation biker and resident of the City, I believe it would be a great mistake for this project to be approved without the integration of "on the ground" accommodations for people on bicycles in the overall design. The Complete Streets Act of 2008 should ensure that all users of the transportation system, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users as well as children, older individuals, and individuals with disabilities, are able to travel safely and conveniently on streets and highways within the public right of way." The needs of all users, not just motorists, and not just the residents on the street, should be considered. The City Council has a unique opportunity here to be sure that the design of these streets now, and the remainder of the streets as improvements are necessary, accommodate our environmentally-conscious culture and incorporates the use of all modes of transportation. Please deny the design project until such time as it is incorporates the needs of all of the City's residents. Very truly yours, Paul Adkins 180 North Polk Street Eugene, OR 97402 (541) 255-2478 - 18 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 From: M Burke [mailto:mburke59@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 1:53 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Skinny Streets ( Crest Drive Streets) Mayor & City Councilors, I want to thank you for approving 18' streets in the Crest Drive area. I also want to encourage you to approve the proposed street designs and the 4' sidewalks. Our strees are unique and the proposed designs from the Crest Team will enable all residents and users to be safe. We would rather have pot holes than have wider streets. Thank you. Marg Burke From: Cindy Byrn [mailto:cindyb405@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 5:08 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: No collector for Crest We were tolad at a public open houses that the Crest Drive streets would not be clasified as neighborhood collectors. Now we are being informed that in order for the city to fund the project the streets will have to be collectors. I feel that once again we have not been told the truth by the city staff. This process started several years ago because the city wanted to classify the streets as neighborhood collectors. The neighbors objected to this proposal and we attended several oopen houses to see proposed designs. If the city does not have the money to do this project then I guess wel will just have to live with the existing streets until fjundin sources are available. Cindy Byrn From: Anderson Krantz [mailto:arkrantz@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 3:36 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: S.O.S. Save Our Streets - Crest Area Mayor Piercy & City Councilors, We want skinny streets! Please approve the proposed Crest area designs. Anderson & Roxanne Krantz From: Larry L [mailto:llexpansion@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 1:39 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: No Bike Lanes in Crest Drive Area Mayor and Councilors, - 19 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Our streets are incredibly steep!!!! The very few bicyclists that attempt to ride up the streets usually end up walking their bikes. Or as, Sue Wolling, president of the Eugene Bike Coalition stated at a recent City Council meeting, those bicyclists who are able to ride up these steep streets must zig zag across the street to make it to the top. We would have to have a zig zag bike lane to accommodate these bikers. That doesn't really make much sense. What will protect all of us is narrow streets with slow moving traffic. We don't need bike lanes to accommodate the very few bicyclists that do attempt to ride or streets! A bile lane would make the streets wider and it has been proven that cars travel faster on wider streets. May you should all try to ride a bike up these streets. NO BIKE LANES!!!!!!!! Larry Larson -----Original Message----- From: jim [mailto:hjobrien@bluebottle.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 4:51 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Safe Narrow Streets (Crest) We are very excited about the proposed street designs for the Cresd Drive area. Our neighborhood is unique and has very unique needs. We feel that the proposed designs will fit in with the fell of our neighborhood. We also support shared roads. We look forward to being proud of our new streets. Please approve the proposed designs. Helen & Jim O'Brien From: Cindy Anderson [mailto:canders@uoregon.edu] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:47 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Roads Hello, I am writing to express my opinion regarding the Crest Roads area. I am certain you are inundated with opinions as…this is Eugene and we do opine, don’t we? As a cyclist who rides often in the area, I am encouraging you most strongly to have all roads include a bike lane on hills. I have heard it argued that because the roads are twisty and narrow, bike lanes are not needed. In fact, this is PRECISELY why they are needed on climbs. Cyclists are going slowly up hills and we have no where to go to get out of the way on narrow roads. This is not a problem on decents as we can keep up with the speed of traffic. Some have said that few will commute in this area as it is so hilly. First, hills are not an impediment to many commuters. Second, many of us who ride in that area do not commute through there but rather use those roads as a way to get out to Lorraine highway and other routes out of town. Bike lanes will keep us safe. Thank you for your consideration. Cordially, Cynthia Cynthia M. Anderson, PhD - 20 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Program Coordinator, School Psychology Educational and Community Supports University of Oregon 1235 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1235 canders@uoregon.edu phone: 541.346.2671 fax: 541.346.5517 http://www.uoecs.org From: lyndell wilken [mailto:lwbicycle@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 9:42 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Drive Editorials in the Register Guard Councilors and Mayor: If you have read the editorials in the newspaper it was stated that the CDCT had a Bike/Ped Representative during the process. That part is true. However, what is not made clear is that as the Bike/Ped Representative I did not approve the design because of the absence of a bike lane. My vote of a 1 meaning absolutely unacceptable was given at the final CDCT meeting. At the last open house there was an outcry from the Bike Community opposing the design. The input from the open house was not seriously considered and the design was railroaded through the final meeting despite opposition from bicyclists. In addition, when the council approved the 18 foot street from a 20 foot street there was never a public open house to give the public a chance to weigh in on the changed design. Do not let committee members lead you to believe that I went along with their final design. I have had a very good working relationship with the members of this committee. Don't let that lead you to believe I have endorsed the design. Lyndell Wilken From: lyndell wilken [mailto:lwbicycle@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 10:43 AM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Subject: Crest Drive Process Councilors and Mayor: I know you feel committed to following through with the outcome of the CDCT process. I had hoped you would see the process has been flawed in that other users of the road were never given a chance to have their input incorporated into the plan. The neighbors had their minds made up from day one as to what they would accept and the two years of open houses and any dialogue contrary to their ideas were never part of the process. A sidewalk would have been eliminated if the city had not put the brakes on and insisted - 21 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 "There has to be a sidewalk". This shows the role the city should have played in the inclusion of bike lanes. The unfortunate part of this process is that our talented engineers and city planners were on the sidelines unable to come forth with a plan that would have included a place for everyone on the road. If the neighbors had been given parameters inclusive of sidewalks and bike lanes, I think they would have continued the process including bike lanes just like they did for the sidewalks. As it turned out the neighbors complete and overwhelming representation on the CDCT negated all other users input and tied the hands of the city from doing their job of representing all users. I would appreciate your response and thoughts to this email. Lyndell Wilken Bike/Pedestrian Rep. CDCT From: Gene Johnson [mailto:GeneJ@solarc-ae.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 12:26 PM To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council Cc: Paul C Moore Subject: Crest Drive Bike Lane Dear Councilors and Mayor Piercy: Okay, I've stood by and watched and listened to this dialog for many weeks (or months) without getting involved, partly because I was sure that even the indefatigable Paul Moore would be worn down by the "powers that be" and that things would go the wrong way no matter what I said or did. But I was wrong to wait, and I most certainly underestimated the commitment of Paul and many others who have refused to let the issue die. My hat is off to all of you. So, here are my two cents: I am a cyclist, and like Paul, believe firmly that the time is ALWAYS NOW to begin to invest for an alternative future that is clearly going to become more compelling as time goes by. We ABSOLUTELY MUST provide bicycle lanes wherever we build roads, period. They MUST be safe and inviting for cyclists to use. The added cost of that particular portion project should be funded by the City, which benefits in many ways both direct and indirect. These things seem so obvious, and our community rhetoric has so fully embraced them in the past, that its incredible to me that we are even having this protracted debate! The interests of the larger community, NOT the local neighbors, should be upheld by you, our public representatives. Pure and simple. - 22 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08 Thanks in advance for executing your public offices for the good of the entire community. Sincerely, Gene Johnson 3059 Whitbeck Blvd 345-9042 - 23 - Crest Drive CSS Design Recommendation Public Testimony 2/14/08 through 4/8/08