The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 6: Resolution Forming LID for Crest Drive ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Action: Approval of Minutes, Findings and Recommendation from the Hearings Official and Adoption of Resolution 4984 Forming a Local Improvement District (Lid) for Paving, Curbs, Sidewalks, Medians, Street Lights, Stormwater Drainage and Water Quality Facilities on Crest Drive from Blanton Road to Lincoln Street, Storey Boulevard th from Crest Drive to Lorane Highway, and Friendly Street from Lorane Highway to 28 Avenue (Job #4546) Meeting Date: June 22, 2009 Agenda Item Number: 6 Department: Public Works-Engineering Staff Contact: Mark Schoening www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5243 ISSUE STATEMENT The council is being asked to approve the Hearings Official’s Minutes, Findings and Recommendations dated May 29, 2009, and to adopt a resolution forming a Local Improvement District (LID) for paving, curbs, sidewalks, medians, street lights, stormwater drainage and water quality facilities on Crest Drive from Blanton Road to Lincoln Street, Storey Boulevard from Crest Drive to Lorane Highway, and th Friendly Street from Lorane Highway to 28 Avenue. BACKGROUND This project was initiated by the council action on September 8, 2008, when the council authorized the preparation of plans and specifications and call of bids for construction of the local improvements pursuant to Section 7.160(5) of the Eugene Code, 1971. Bids were opened on May 21, 2009, with Babb Construction Company, dba Delta Construction Company, dba Delta Concrete, as the apparent low bidder. Bid prices were very competitive from the five bidders and construction costs were well below the engineers estimate. The property owners were notified of the pending LID hearing ten (10) days prior to the hearing as required by Eugene Code. A LID formation hearing conducted by a hearings official was held on May 28, 2009. At that hearing information was presented about the City’s assessment policies and procedures and the estimated assessments based on the low bid received. The City Council received the Hearing Official’s Minutes, Findings and Recommendations, the City Engineer’s Report, and written testimony received prior to the close of the public hearing on May 28 as part of the AIS for the public hearing before the council on June 15. Prior to the hearing, the City received a remonstrance petition signed by multiple property owners. Taking into account the property owners who subsequently requested their names be removed from the petition and the irrevocable petitions, the petition signatures represent 73 properties representing 65% of the assessable frontage. Eugene Code requires that the public hearing be continued before City Council Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090622\S0906226.doc if remonstrance is received from owners who would pay over 50% of the assessments. Because of over 50% remonstrance, in addition to the continuance of the hearing, a two-thirds affirmative vote of the City Council is required to form the LID. The continuance hearing was held before the council on June 15, 2009. Twenty-six people testified at the continued hearing in front of the council. The testimony was fairly evenly split between those who wanted the assessment policy changed even if it means delaying the project and those who want the project to proceed as planned. Many of those who want the project to proceed requested that alternatives be found to reduce the assessments. A minority of people testified that they wanted changes to the assessment policy or a reduction in the assessments without clearly stating whether they approved of a project delay. RELATED CITY POLICIES The Municipal Charter, Chapter IX- Public Improvements, provides the regulatory framework for public improvement procedures and assessments. The Eugene Code, Chapter 7 – Public Improvements, prescribes the process for the initiation of an assessment project, formation of a local improvement district, and computation and allocation of assessments to benefiting properties. COUNCIL OPTIONS Per Section 7.166(3) of the Eugene City Code, the City Council may take the following actions: 1.Adopt the resolution forming the LID 2.Substantially modify the improvements, rebidding if necessary, and then conduct a hearing on the modified improvements 3.Delay the approval not more than 15 days 4.Abandon the improvements CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends that the City Council approve the Minutes, Findings and Recommendations of the Hearings Official and adopt the resolution forming the LID. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the Hearings Official’s Minutes, Findings and Recommendations of June 8, 2009. Move to adopt Resolution 4984 forming a Local Improvement District for paving, curbs, sidewalks, medians, street lights, stormwater drainage and water quality facilities on Crest Drive from Blanton Road to Lincoln Street, Storey Boulevard from Crest Drive to Lorane Highway, and Friendly Street th from Lorane Highway to 28 Avenue. ATTACHMENTS A.Proposed Resolution B.Vicinity Map C.Correspondence Regarding the Formation of the LID (May 29, 2009 to June 15, 2009) Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090622\S0906226.doc FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Mark Schoening Telephone: 682-5243 Staff E-Mail: mark.a.schoening@ci.eugene.or.us Z:\CMO\2009 Council Agendas\M090622\S0906226.doc ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION FORMING A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) FOR PAVING, CONSTRUCTING CURBS, SIDEWALKS, MEDIANS, STREET LIGHTS, STORMWATER DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY FACILITIES ON CREST DRIVE FROM BLANTON ROAD TO LINCOLN STREET, STOREY BOULEVARD FROM CREST DRIVE TO LORANE HIGHWAY, AND FRIENDLY STREET FROM TH LORANE HIGHWAY TO 28 AVENUE. (JOB #4546) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. After proper notice of the hearings required by Sections 7.165 and 7.166 of the Eugene Code, 1971 (EC), and after conducting a public hearing on May 28, 2009, receiving the hearings officer’s minutes, findings, and recommendations, and, in accordance with EC 7.166(2), continuing the public hearing before the City Council on June 15, 2009, the City Council hereby declares it is in the public interest to construct the local improvements described in Section 2 of this Resolution and assess part of the costs thereof to the specially benefitted properties on Crest Drive from Blanton Road to Lincoln Street, Storey Boulevard from Crest th Drive to Lorane Highway, and Friendly Street from Lorane Highway to 28 Avenue. Section 2. The City Council hereby orders the establishment of a local improvement district on Crest Drive from Blanton Road to Lincoln Street, Storey Boulevard from Crest Drive th to Lorane Highway, and Friendly Street from Lorane Highway to 28 Avenue and in that district to pave, construct curbs, sidewalks, medians, street lights, stormwater drainage and water quality facilities and related improvements (“the Improvements”). Section 3. The costs of the Improvements shall be borne by and assessed to the properties in the district in accordance with EC 7.175. Included in the cost shall be the overhead costs specified in EC 7.170 and whatever other special costs, such as acquisition of interests in real property, that are necessary to make the Improvements. Upon completion of the Improvements, the final costs therefore will be calculated and the owners of the benefitted property shall be notified and the property assessed as provided in EC 7.185 to 7.240. The assessments to be levied for the Improvements are hereby characterized for purposes of the property tax limitation in Section 11b, Art. XI of the Oregon Constitution as assessments for a local improvement, not subject to the constitutional limitation of $10 per thousand of real market value. Notice of the intent to so characterize the assessments was sent to the affected property owners prior to the adoption of this Resolution. Section 4. The City Council hereby declares that the construction of the Improvements, as well as acquisition of temporary easements necessary for the construction, is for a public purpose, is necessary for the public welfare, is authorized under the laws of the State of Oregon and Charter and ordinances of the City of Eugene, and is directed by this Resolution. Resolution - Page 1 of 2 Section 5. The City of Eugene, Oregon expects to make expenditures from its available funds to initially pay for the costs of the improvements to Crest Drive from Blanton Road to Lincoln Street, Storey Boulevard from Crest Drive to Lorane Highway, and Friendly Street from th Lorane Highway to 28 Avenue (the “Project”). The City reasonably expects, and hereby declares its intent, to issue bonds or other obligations (the “Reimbursement Bonds”) and to use the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures made from the City’s available funds for the Project. The City expects that the principal amount of the Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed the total project cost of $3,791,37.34. The Reimbursement Bonds are secured by and payable from the installments of final assessments established in accordance with Section 3 of this Resolution. Section 6. Lines of credit and other evidence of indebtedness authorized by City Council Resolution No. 4937 may be issued to finance the construction of the Improvements. Section 7. Proceeds from unbonded assessments, improvement bonds, foreclosure of liens based on the Improvements and from other budgeted funds including ad valorem taxes, if levied, to pay the debt shall be deposited in the Special Assessments Capital Projects Fund until the indebtedness issued to finance the Improvements is redeemed. Proceeds so deposited may be used only to pay the indebtedness issued to finance the Improvements. Section 8. The City Manager, or the person designated in writing by the City Manager to act under Resolution No. 4937, may sign the evidence of indebtedness issued to finance the construction of the Improvements. Section 9. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. The foregoing Resolution adopted the 22nd day of June, 2009. ________________________________________ AIC City Recorder 00229112.DOC;1 Resolution - Page 2 of 2 From: wilsonefmp@aol.com [mailto:wilsonefmp@aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 10:25 PM To: Betty.L.Taylor@ci.eugene.or.us Subject: Crest Drive Repair Dear In 1972, I moved to Eugene with my wife and three daughters. We bought and moved into a house at 860 West 38th Ave. located about 200 yards from the junction of Crest Drive and Blanton Road, which is about 100 yards from Crest Elementary School where our daughters went to school. All daughters graduated from SEHS, the last one in 1987, shortly thereafter my wife and I sold our home and moved from Eugene. We happily retired to Eugene in 2000, purchased land on a street off Blanton Rd., and built a home approximately 3/8ths of a mile from the junction of Crest Drive and Blanton Rd. The streets are worse now than when we moved from Eugene and we do not know why the streets have been allowed to progressively deteriorate for 38 years. Please do not delay until the first lawsuit against the City of Eugene is filed by a person injured or family of a person killed due to unlawful hazardous road conditions. How much will that cost the tax payers? Thank you for your attention and patience with this e-mail. Ed and Marion Wilson, 4035 Southpointe Dr., Eugene; Tele: 434-6434 Ú®±³æÝ±²²·»É±²¸¿³Å³¿·´¬±æ½±²²·»©±²¸¿³à½±³½¿¬ò²»¬Ã Í»²¬æÉ»¼²»¼¿§ôÖ«²»ïðôîððçïðæëèÐÓ Ì±æÞ»¬¬§òÔòÌ¿§´±®à½·ò»«¹»²»ò±®ò« Í«¾¶»½¬æÝ®»¬Ü®·ª»Î±¿¼×«» Ü»¿®ÓòÌ¿§´±®ô Ó§²¿³»·Ý±²²·»É±²¸¿³ò×´·ª»·²ÍÉÛ«¹»²»±ººÍ¬±®»§Þ´ª¼ò×¿³¿ ½±³³«²·¬§ª±´«²¬»»®ôº±®³»®¬»¿½¸»®ô¿²¼¾±¿®¼³»³¾»®º±®Þ·®¬¸¬± Ì¸®»»òÓ§¸«¾¿²¼¿²¼×®»´±½¿¬»¼¸»®»º®±³ÝÌ·²ïççëòÌ¸»®±¿¼ ©»®»²±¬·²¹±±¼½±²¼·¬·±²»ª»²¬¸»²¾«¬¬¸»§©»®»²±¬¬¸»¬«²²·²¹ ¼·¿¬»®¬¸¿¬¬¸»§¿®»¬±¼¿§òÉ»¼·¼²±¬µ²±©¬¸»²¬¸¿¬¬¸»¸±«»©» ©»®»¾«§·²¹©¿±²¬®»»¬²±¬³¿·²¬¿·²»¼¾§¬¸»½·¬§òÉ¸±½±«´¼ ·³¿¹·²»«½¸¿½»²¿®·±»¨·¬»¼áÒ±¬±³»±²»²»©¬±Ñ®»¹±²ò ×¬®¿ª»´¬¸»¿ºº»½¬»¼¬®»»¬·²±«®²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼³±®»¬¸¿²ïð¬·³» ¼¿·´§ò×¸¿ª»¬¸®»»½¸·´¼®»²¿´´·²²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼½¸±±´Ý®»¬ Ü®·ª»ôÍ°»²½»®Þ«¬¬»¿²¼Í±«¬¸Û«¹»²»ò×»¬·³¿¬»³§º¿³·´§½±³¾·²»¼ ³¿µ»±ª»®ïë¬®·°¿¼¿§±ª»®®±¿¼«®º¿½»¬¸¿¬¿®»²±¬º·¬¬±¾» ½¿´´»¼®±¿¼«®º¿½»òÓ§¸«¾¿²¼ôÛ²¹´·¸¼»°¬¸»¿¼¿¬¬¸»Ë±ºÑô ®·¼»¿½±±¬»®±ª»®¬¸»¬®»¿½¸»®±«®±¿¼¬±©±®µò ×¿³¸¿ª·²¹¿²·³°±·¾´»¬·³»¾»´·»ª·²¹¬¸¿¬¿²ïï¬¸¸±«®°»¬·¬·±² º®±³®»·¼»²¬±º¬¸»¿ºº»½¬»¼¬®»»¬½±«´¼¬¸®»¿¬»²¬±¼»®¿·´¿ °®±¶»½¬¬¸¿¬¸¿¾»»²·²¬¸»©±®µº±®§»¿®òÌ¸»¿»³»²¬·ÒÑÌ ²»©²»©¬±¬¸»»®»·¼»²¬ò×¬¸¿¾»»²°«¾´·½·¦»¼º±®§»¿®òß²¼¬¸» ¿³±«²¬±º¬¸»¿»³»²¬¿®»²±©³«½¸´±©»®¬¸¿²®»°±®¬»¼»ª»²¿º»© ©»»µ¿¹±ô³¿µ·²¹¬¸·°±¬»²¬·¿´´§¬¸»³±¬±°°±®¬«²»¬·³»·²§»¿®¬± ½±³°´»¬»¬¸»®»°¿·®òÉ¸·´»×¿¹®»»¬¸¿¬¬¸»Û«¹»²»¿»³»²¬§¬»³ ·¾±¬¸«²««¿´ô«²«·¬¿¾´»¿²¼¾¿¼´§·²²»»¼±º·³°®±ª»³»²¬ô·¬· ±«®½«®®»²¬½·ª·½´¿©¿²¼¸¿¾»»²¿°°´·»¼¬±³¿²§±¬¸»®®±¿¼ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬°®±¶»½¬·²¬¸»°¿¬ò×¿³½»®¬¿·²¬¸¿¬ßÒÇ®±¿¼ ·³°®±ª»³»²¬°®±¶»½¬°®±°±»¼¬±¼¿§©±«´¼¾»±°°±»¼¾§¬¸±»©¸±¸¿ª» ¬±°¿§º±®·¬òÒÑÑÒÛ©¿²¬¬±°¿§òß²¼×¼±²ù¬¾´¿³»¬¸»³º±®¿ ³·²«¬»ò Þ«¬¬¸¿¬·²±¬¬¸»·«»¿¬¸¿²¼òÌ¸»»®±¿¼¿®»«»¼¾§¸«²¼®»¼±º Û«¹»²»½·¬·¦»²»ª»®§¼¿§ô²±¬¶«¬¾§¬¸»°»±°´»©¸±´·ª»±²¬¸»³ò Ì¸»§´»¿¼¬±¿½¸±±´¿²¼±«¬¬±©·²»®·»¿²¼¬±¾«·²»»«½¸¿ ÕÊßÔòÚ·®»¬®«½µ¿²¼½¸±±´¾«»³«¬²¿ª·¹¿¬»¬¸»»®±¿¼ô²±¬¬± ³»²¬·±²½¸·´¼®»²¿²¼°»¼»¬®·¿²òÌ¸»»®±¿¼¿®»²±¬¼»¿¼»²¼´¿²» ©·¬¸¿º»©¸±³»òÌ¸»§¿®»¬¸±®±«¹¸º¿®»òß²¼¿«½¸¬¸»§¿®» «²¿º»ô¼»¬®·³»²¬¿´¬±ª»¸·½´»¿²¼¬¸»»²ª·®±²³»²¬ô¿²¼·³°±·¾´»¬± ²¿ª·¹¿¬»¾§¬¸»½¸·´¼®»²·²¬¸»»²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼òÌ¸»®»·¿¾±´«¬»´§ ÒÑ±°¬·±²¾«¬¬±®»°¿·®¬¸»»®±¿¼òÌ¸»½·¬§½±«²½·´¿·¼¿³«½¸ ©¸»²¬¸·°®±¶»½¬©¿¾»¹«²ò Ì¸»¬·³»¬±³¿µ»¬¸»»®±¿¼®»°¿·®·²±©òÌ¸»½±¬©·´´²»ª»®¾» ´±©»®òÌ¸»»ºº»½¬©·´´®·°°´»·²¬±±«®½±³³«²·¬§©·¬¸·²½®»¿»¼ ¿º»¬§ô¶±¾½®»¿¬·±²ô¿²¼»¨¬»²·±²±º²±®³¿´®±¿¼¾»²»º·¬¬±¬¸» ¸«²¼®»¼±º¬¿¨°¿§·²¹½·¬·¦»²©¸±¬®¿ª»´¬¸»¬®»»¬·²±«®¿®»¿òß º¿®¿×½¿²¬»´´ô©»°¿§¬¿¨»¿¬¬¸»¿³»®¿¬»¿±¬¸»®½·¬·¦»²ò Þ«¬©»¿®»²±¬¾»·²¹»¨¬»²¼»¼¬¸»¾»²»º·¬±º°¿ª»¼®±¿¼¬¸¿¬±¬¸»® ½·¬·¦»²·²Û«¹»²»»²¶±§òÝ±²¬·²«»¼¼·®»°¿·®©·´´±²´§°±·²¬±«¬¬¸» ·²¿¾·´·¬§±º¬¸»½·¬§¬±³¿·²¬¿·²·¬·²º®¿¬®«½¬«®»°®±°»®´§¿²¼ ¶»±°¿®¼·¦»¬¸»©»´´¾»·²¹±º¬¸±»©¸±³«¬«»¬¸»»®±¿¼±²¿¼¿·´§ ¾¿·ò Ç±«¸¿ª»¾»»²»´»½¬»¼¬±¿½¬·²¬¸»¾»¬·²¬»®»¬±º¬¸»³¿¶±®·¬§±º Û«¹»²»ù½·¬·¦»²òÑ«®®±¿¼³«¬¾»°¿ª»¼òÌ±¬¸¿¬»²¼ô×½¿²±²´§ »»¬¸¿¬¬¸»½·¬§½±«²½·´±®©·´´«°°±®¬¬¸»°´¿²¬¸¿¬¸¿¾»»² ³±ª·²¹¿´±²¹º±®§»¿®ô¿´´±©·²¹«¬±°«¬¬¸»´»²¹¬¸§¿²¼«²¸»¿´¬¸§ ¼»¾¿¬»¿¾±«¬±«®®±¿¼¾»¸·²¼«òß½½±®¼·²¹´§ô×¿´±¸±°»¬±»»¬¸» ½·¬§©±®µ·²¹©·¬¸¿»»¼²»·¹¸¾±®¬±³¿µ»«®»¬¸¿¬¬¸»¿»³»²¬ ¼±»²±¬³±ª»¿²§¸±«»¸±´¼·²¬±¿°±·¬·±²±ºº·²¿²½·¿´¸¿®¼¸·°ò ×«®¹»§±«¬±±ª»®¬«®²¬¸»®»³±²¬®¿²½»¿²¼»¬¿¾´·¸¬¸»Ô×Üò Ì¸¿²µ§±«º±®§±«®¬·³»¿²¼½±²·¼»®¿¬·±²ò Ý±²²·»É±²¸¿³ From: Robbin Howard [mailto:robbinch@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 7:22 PM To: Robbin Howard Cc: *Eugene Mayor and City Council; TAYLOR Betty L; PIERCY Kitty Subject: Re: Crest Drive, Storey Blvd, Friendly Street Assessments Update trying again since it didn't like one address. On Jun 11, 2009, at 7:14 PM, Robbin Howard wrote: respectfully submitted to the city councilors, RE: Crest Drive Road Project 6/15 public hearing and 6/22 vote by Councilors The roads are no longer safe in this area. Please vote to establish (whatever it is) that starts the funding and assessment for this project and begin construction this summer. Please vote with an overwhelming majority to overrule the remonstrance that was filed and to carry on with this project. Everytime I drive through that little block long connector between Crest Drive and Storey Boulevard I'm amazed my car hasn't fallen totally apart, wonder if I need another alignment already, and wonder when how much longer any of us will be able to drive the road. These roads and the citizens will not last through another delay. There is alot here, it took me over an hour to write, I appreciate your taking the time to consider these numerous points. reasons why this project should go forward, why voting to continue is important and advisable: bio-swale, water drainage improvements etc infrastructure improvements - a primary responsibility of a city as a government federal stimulus dollars are available and limited to shovel ready project and this is one - listening to one mayor speak on OPB of how fast everyone had to use stimulus dollars having some down sides -he was displeased of how they used it in his city, wishing they could have done more infrastructure projects - The crest drive road project is such a project, something that has to be done that has long term benefits and which would make a difference jobs in city, stimulate the city's economics my understanding is that the RFP has already gone out and a company may have already been chosen do you want to vote for more job loss or vote to continue the projects and keep those jobs intact consider whether or not the city can always retroactively restructure the funding if funds become available or the assessment process changes and reimburse citizens - they can add that into this project - that if it gets restructured w/in the next 5 years they'll reimburse folks or some such.... as a taxpayer I'm reasonably bothered, as any average person would be, why should we pay our share of taxes: we can't get up our roads we have to pay allignment costs to maintain car we incur additional costs to replace shocks on our cars before it would normally be necessary my child hears me swear often, if I end up hitting the 3- 4 inch deep potholes by accident, and each time I swear she charges me a dollar - now I can exercise more self control, and you can vote to alleviate the pothole problem already I pay property taxes and get no road maintenance done by the city on the road to my home because it is gravel - so I am paying for something many others automatically get, a pothole free paved driveable road in front of their house. safety- does the city really want to get sued? remember the cost of not taking care of issues on the police force & unwanted sexual attention on citizen. does the city want to accept the risk of suits due to bad driving to avoid pot holes because the city has not finished this 8 year project of death and kids getting hit by cars as they walk to school without one sidewalk of our 78yr old female neighbor walking up Friendly St with her groceries to keep in shape getting hit by a car or falling due to road conditions we, and you, should be able to drive the roads and look out for people, not for potholes that damage our car. consider - aren't potholes the equivalent of cell phones in the sense of a safety distraction financial - are you willing to waste taxpayer dollars. Probably well over $500K has been spent on this project, some to outside consultants at the beginning of the CSD project, some on city staff and engineer wages, and much of your time as well. fiduciary responsibility as a city councilor as a taxpayer, I would consider it a failure in fiduciary responsibility on the councilor's parts if they fail to set up the Improvement District (or whatever the next step is that you are voting on) that allows this road project to continue to completion) and the funds and effort that have been spent to date become sunk costs. inflammatory language/incomplete presentation/remonstrance motivations the remonsterance petition was presented with inflamatory language, language crafted to inspire and encourage signatures without presenting the entire picture, it was shoved down folks faces with advertising marketing like promotion 'do you really want to pay 20K' nothing was mentioned of the funds available to those who can't afford it, loans, waivers, etc - and you know that is available to ciitzens I overheard a non-homeowner stranger in the eugene public library bragging about getting the remonsterance through and stopping how the city currently assesses & funds public road projects and get it changed. some of you councilors know the petition is due to a wish to change the funding structure of road improvements and want the structure to change, so you may be motivated to vote no to going forward on the project, Please don't take it out on the citizens. Accept responsibility for the past lack of city management and city councilor foresight to direct and take proactive steps to change that funding structure. Start now with a separate and distinct work group that is focused on changing the funding structure. Do not give up this over 6 year project and reduce the trust in contact sensitive design process and the city's integrity in fiscal responsibility and keeping their word (in a time when integrity and transparency are both important). we've heard that the person that started this remonstrance petition may stand to either be assessed because the chose to purchase alot of land/lots, and or they own land near the urban growth boundary - if the funding changes, they won't have to pay....look at this motivation be hind the petition. the longer you wait to take care of the roads, the more the cost increases.... oil, labor, insurance - you name it. don't increase the cost burden any more by further delays. This project was supposed to have been started in March 2009. If you had kept to the plan, this remonstrance would not have happened in the first place. the remonstrance motivation appears to be atleast 3+ fold (1) the city has not done it's job by proactively changing how road improvements are funded (look to best practices and I'd bet Eugene's practice is on the bottom of the list- lets get that on an internal auditor or state auditor's list...) (2) current practices in homeownership: finances of homeowners to be assessed- no home owner sets aside 500/mo to pay for eventual future road improvements... they pay mortgage payment, homeowners insurance, interest and property taxes... how can the city expect any homeowner/landowner to come up with 20k without a common practice in our country of doing that. (that's the cost of a college education, etc) the city's current funding model has unrealistic expectations given current societal homeownership practices (3) the person(s) who started it may stand to gain personally from a business (vs homeowner) perspective - if you stop this project, they won't get assessed and the city(someone else) will pay for improvements that allow them to gain when they develop their property and sell it... (4) i also heard a rumor that Mark Shonig's (sp) boss, who does not know the history of this project, is waiting for it to fail, so they can start over and go back to the beginning (collector) which is what started all the hoop-la in the beginning. Don't go there please. we are concerned that this vote comes at a time where there are new councilor who may lack sufficient history and awareness of this project. please review the files if you are a councilor that has not been watching this develop for the past 8 years - read everything from the beginning which includes having to move the assigned city staff Gary McNeal off the project because he wanted a neighborhood collector designations which the entire neighborhood (from those voting for the remonsterance and those who did not sign) and at that time did not have sufficient skills to work on the contact sensitive design process, to the public hearings keeping the streets narrow, to the citizens expectation and reliance on the city which said the road construction work would begin Spring of 2009, to the current situation and vote. also, please take a drive up these roads and consider how wonderful the design is that has been developed through cooperation of citizens and city, that resulted in mutual agreement and increased respect. IN CONCLUSION - some of my understanding of your obligation as public servants and city councillors is to take care of the city, to make sure the youngest citizens are safe (able to walk to school, parents able to safely drive on streets (with out endangering people or damaging property due to potholes) and their future environment is still a healthy one (no collector street/ increase in paved area/ cut down trees/ lack of proper use of water/drainage), you have the charge of governing. You have the charge of being transparent and honest, a tone being set at the top. Why begin a process such as this contact sensitive design process and the crest roads projcet (both of which is awesome by the way - we are so excited to see this project to completion), just to tear it down? If there is a need to fix the funding structure or road improvements in our city, well, take action and research best practices and make the change, do not stop this project and take it out on the good city tax paying citizens of crest drive that have a reasonable expectation after 6 years of effort of seeing the city do what it set out to do, set a flagstone successful contact sensitive design process project, a true partnership between city and citizens, and execute the plan. ps You need to give the west 11th folks hope that their efforts to craft a good transportation solution will not be in vain either. will atleast one of you send a courtesy reply back so I know you received it. Thanks. and good luck in these squiggly difficult times - there's lots for all of us to do to help all of us survive and continue to thrive. I know you are working hard in these difficult times and I appreciate it very much. respectfully Submitted by: Robbin Howard 3217 whitten drive(inspiration pt drive) eugene or 97405 I have been involved in this project since the beginning From: DeGiulio, Jules [mailto:Jules.DeGiulio@lifetech.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 10:06 AM To: Eugene PSO Cc: DeGiulio, Jules Subject: Crest Drive Streets Remonstrance Dear City Manager John Ruiz, I have not written to you before but have writtin to sitting Councilors during the Crest Drive Street Design process. I'm writing today to ask that you please support and advocate for the overturn of the recently submitted remonstrance to the Crest/Storey/Friendly street improvements. I could, as many have, write a littany of reasons why I believe it is imperative to proceed with the design this year. I will keep to a single reason. I believe the overriding issue is the safety of the ~250 children attending Crest Drive Elementary school, which borders this project. I understand that I'm not one of the assessed. We live on Whitten Dr., a scant quarter mile from the school. It is almost beyond my imagination that I cannot allow my 8yr old to walk to school. It is an absolute failure of the community to provide safe walking and biking streets to and from our neighborhood schools. The design as worked out over the past several years would provide the best and safest option as far as this issue is concerned. It beats the City's original collector option. It beats the current "worst set of streets in the city" option. Until this stretch of street is upgraded, I simply cannot allow my son to make his own way to and from school. This is sad. We have stolen from these children this milestone in their growth toward independance. It is simply a right of passage. I know parents who live even closer to the school than we do who put their children on the bus because it is so unsafe on these streets. In our case, my wife walks him to school most days constantly on the alert for the swerving and speeding automobiles; constantly reigning in my typically excited-to-be-going-to- school boy. Please vote to overturn the remonstrance and proceed with the upgrade this construction season. Our children are depending on you. Warmest Personal Regards, Jules DeGiulio, Father of 8yr old Anzo 13 year resident at: 3265 Whitten Dr. Eugene, OR 97405 ph: 541 510 2937 Ú®±³æÜ¿ª·¼Õ±´¾Å³¿·´¬±æ¼¿ªµ±´¾à¹³¿·´ò½±³Ã Í»²¬æÓ±²¼¿§ôÖ«²»ïëôîððçìæðëÐÓ Ì±æöÛ«¹»²»Ó¿§±®¿²¼Ý·¬§Ý±«²½·´ Ý½æÍÝØÑÛÒ×ÒÙÓ¿®µß Í«¾¶»½¬æ¬¿¬»³»²¬±²Ý®»¬Ü®·ª»¬®»»¬ Ì¸··¿¬¿¬»³»²¬º±®¬¸»®»½±®¼±²¬¸»Ý®»¬Ü®·ª»¬®»»¬°®±¶»½¬ò ×¿³©®·¬·²¹¿¿°®·ª¿¬»½·¬·¦»²ô²±¬¿¿Ý®»¬Ü®·ª»Ý·¬·¦»²ß±½·¿¬·±² ¾±¿®¼³»³¾»®ò ß´¬¸±«¹¸×©±«´¼¿¹®»»¬¸¿¬¬¸»§¬»³±º¿»³»²¬°®»»²¬´§·²«»¸±«´¼¾» ½¸¿²¹»¼ô×¼±«¾¬¬¸¿¬¬¸»Ý®»¬°®±¶»½¬¸±«´¼¾»¬±°°»¼±®¼»´¿§»¼ò Ì¸»Ý·¬§Ý±«²½·´¿º»©§»¿®¿¹±®»ª·»©»¼¬¸»¿»³»²¬°±´·½§¿²¼³¿¼»±²´§ ³·²±®½¸¿²¹»ô¼»»³·²¹·¬¬±¾»º¿·®»®¬¸¿²¿²§¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª»ò É¸·´»×©±«´¼¼·¿¹®»»©·¬¸¬¸¿¬¶«¼¹³»²¬ô×°®»«³»¬¸¿¬¿²±¬¸»®®»ª·»©©±«´¼ ³±¬´·µ»´§´»¿¼¬±¿¼¶«¬³»²¬¬¸¿¬³·¹¸¬®»¼«½»¬¸»®¿¬»±º¿»³»²¬¾«¬²±¬ ½¸¿²¹»¬¸»¾¿·½§¬»³ò Ì¸»°®»ª·±«»¨¿³·²¿¬·±²±º¬¸»°±´·½§¬±±µ¬©±§»¿®òÍ±¿´¬¸±«¹¸¼»´¿§·²¹¬¸» °®±¶»½¬¿²¼¬©»¿µ·²¹¬¸»°±´·½§³·¹¸¬´»¿¼¬±±³»®»¼«½¬·±²·²¬¸»®¿¬»±º ¿»³»²¬ô¿º¬»®¬¸»¼»´¿§¬¸»°®±¶»½¬©±«´¼¸¿ª»¬±¾»®»¾·¼¿²¼·¬·²½®»¿»¼ ½±¬©±«´¼°®±¾¿¾´§±ºº»¬¿²§´±©»®»¼®¿¬»òÍ±¿¼»´¿§©±«´¼´·µ»´§´»¿¼¬±¿² ·²½®»¿»·²½±¬º±®¬¸±»¿»»¼ò Ü¿ª·¼Õ±´¾ èìïÉíê¬¸ßª» Û«¹»²»çéìðë