HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 9: Resolution Approving PROS Project and Priority Plan
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Action: Resolution 4863 Approving the Parks, Recreation and
Open Space Project and Priority Plan
Meeting Date: May 8, 2006 Agenda Item Number: 9
Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Carolyn Weiss
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-4909
ISSUE STATEMENT
The Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Project and Priority Plan is presented to City Council for
adoption by resolution. The Project and Priority Plan contains specific information to guide
implementation of parks, recreation, and open space projects over the next 20 years.
BACKGROUND
The Project and Priority Plan includes specific project information such as timeframe for project
implementation, cost estimates, and maps showing existing and proposed resources for each planning
area and for the entire city. The projects identified in the Project and Priority Plan are some of the
specific means by which the strategies identified in the PROS Comprehensive Plan can be implemented.
A City Council work session was held on the proposed Project and Priority Plan on February 13, 2006.
A public hearing on the Project and Priority Plan was held before the City Council on April 10, 2006.
Twenty-one individuals testified in person at the public hearing. Many of those individuals also
submitted written testimony. Following the hearing, the council moved to leave the public record open
for one additional week. Prior to the close of the record on April 17, staff received written testimony
from 41 additional people. All of the written testimony submitted before the close of the record on April
17 is attached to this Agenda Item Summary (AIS) as Attachment E. Staff response to the Public
Hearing testimony is attached to this AIS as Attachment D.
The proposed resolution is included as Attachment A. Exhibit A to Attachment A is the PROS Project
and Priority Plan which has been revised to reflect recent public input and City Council direction. The
revisions are identified in Attachment B, and can be categorized as follows.
?Priority revisions based on public testimony. The priority ranking of these projects has been
modified to respond to public input.
?Project revisions based on City Council direction. These projects have been modified or added to be
consistent with current City Council direction regarding a 2006 bond measure.
?Project and priority revisions based on funding assumptions. These projects, or their priority
ranking, have been modified to be consistent with funding assumptions, while accommodating the
above mentioned revisions based on public testimony and City Council direction.
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060508\S0605089.doc
?Added verbiage to the plan to clarify the process for amending and updating the Project and Priority
Plan.
Additional questions from the City Council which arose during the Public Hearing and subsequent
discussion are addressed in Attachment C. This response addresses questions and requests related to
systems development charges, jurisdictional issues, specific project related questions, and an explanation
of funding assumptions.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
This item relates to the PROS Comprehensive Plan, adopted by City Council on February 13, 2006.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
A. Approve the proposed resolution that adopts the PROS Project and Priority Plan.
B. Direct the City Manager to make modifications to the PROS Project and Priority Plan and return to
the council.
C. Take no action.
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Option A
The City Manager recommends : Approve the proposed resolution that adopts the PROS
Project and Priority Plan.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to adopt Resolution 4863 approving the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority
Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Proposed Resolution Adopting the PROS Project and Priority Plan
Exhibit A to Attachment A, PROS Project and Priority Plan
?
B. Table indicating revisions to Project and Priority Plan
C. Response to Questions from Council
D. Response to Public Testimony
E. Public Testimony
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Carolyn Weiss, Parks and Open Space Planning Manager
Telephone: 682-4909
Staff E-Mail: carolyn.j.weiss@ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060508\S0605089.doc
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 4863
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PARKS, RECREATION AND
OPEN SPACE PROJECT AND PRIORITY PLAN.
The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that:
A.
The City of Eugene’s Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Project and
Priority Plan was created after planning and public input in association with the Parks,
Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan. The PROS Project and Priority Plan
identifies, prioritizes, and estimates costs of proposed actions for parks, open space and
recreation facilities, programs, and services.
B.
The PROS Project and Priority Plan is adopted in accordance with the state
statutory system development charge (SDC) requirements set forth at ORS 223.304 and
ORS 223.309.
C.
Public involvement was a major component of the planning process, culminating
with a public hearing on April 10, 2006.
D.
The City Council has reviewed and considered the attached PROS Project and
Priority Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a
Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows:
Section 1.
Based on the above findings which are adopted, and the public hearing held
on this matter, the PROS Project and Priority Plan attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution is
approved.
Section 2.
This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.
The foregoing Resolution adopted the _____ day of ____________________, 2006.
_______________________________________
City Recorder
Resolution - 1 Page
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060508\S0605089-attA.doc
Acquisition Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4
Prioriy 5
Project Revisions
DevelopmentCostsCostsCostsCosts Type of Revision Previously Basis for Revision
Beyond FY 26
TOTALSFY 07 - FY 11 FY 12 - FY 16 FY 17 - FY 21 FY 22 - FY 26
New Parks and Open Space - Neighborhood Parks
$ 500,000 $ 500,000
Acquire a neighborhood park site to serve this area (B4) New Project na Previously omitted, added for bond consistency
Listing Neighborhood Park separate from
$ 500,000 $ 500,000
Acquire land for neighborhood park (WC1) Funding Revision $1,250,000
adjacent Ridgeline
Listing Neighborhood Park separate from
$ 500,000 $ 500,000
Acquire land for neighborhood park (WC3) Funding Revision $1,250,000
adjacent Ridgeline
$ 480,000 $ 480,000
Develop neighborhood park site (B4) New Project na Previously omitted
New Parks and Open Space - Community Parks
Aquire Amazon Park inholdings along Hilyard for community park
$ 1,000,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000
Priority Revision Priority 1 Priority adjustment to balance project timing
use
Acquire 100+ acres surrounding Golden Gardens ponds for
$ 2,000,000 $ 200,000 $ 1,800,000
Priority Revision Priority 3 Public Testimony
community park
Develop Golden Gardens and acquired property as community park
$ 3,600,000 $ 500,000 $ 3,100,000
Priority Revision Priority 5 Public Testimony
with significant natural area components and trails
New Parks and Open Space - Urban Plazas
Acquire land in Bethel for urban plaza to be developed in
$ 425,000 $ 425,000
Priority Revision Priority 3 Priority adjustment to balance project timing
partnership with transit
$ 425,000 $ 425,000
Acquire land to expand park blocks Priority Revision Priority 1 Priority adjustment to balance project timing
$ 425,000 $ 425,000
Acquire land for an urban plaza in Santa Clara Priority Revision Priority 3 Priority adjustment to balance project timing
New Parks and Open Space - Linear Parks
$ 480,000 $ 60,000$ 420,000
Implement plan for Jefferson Area Greenway and linear park Priority Revision Priority 3 Public Testimony
$ 200,000 $ 200,000 Priority Revision
Acquire linear park along Roosevelt drainage channel Priority 3 Priority adjustment to balance project timing
New Parks and Open Space - Natural Areas
Bond Consistency: Increased funding from
$ 2,700,000 $ 2,025,000 $ 675,000
Acquire additional river frontage, including property north of Beltline Funding Revision $600,000
previous low estimates
Acquire additional ridgeline to complete Fern Ridge to West Eugene
$ 5,000,000 $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 $ -
Priority Revision Priority 2 & 3 Priority adjustmnt to balance project timing
Wetlands
New Recreation Facilities
$ 220,000 $ 220,000 Priority Revision
Develop soccer field at N. Westmoreland Priority 1 Priority adjustment to balance project timing
Provide synthetic surface fields in partnership with 4J and Bethel
$ 4,000,000 $ 4,000,000 New Projectna
Bond Consistency
school districts
Improving Existing Facilities
Renovate Alton Baker Canoe Canal for kayaking, recreation, and
$ 5,000,000 $ 100,000 $ 4,900,000 Priority RevisionPriority 2
Public Testimony
natural resource benefits
Provide for replacement of synthetic surface fields in partnership Priority Revision/
$ 2,500,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Priority 5
Bond Consistency
with 4JFunding Revision
Project and Priority Plan - Revisions -May 2006
Acquisition Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4
Prioriy 5
Project Revisions
DevelopmentCostsCostsCostsCosts Type of Revision Previously Basis for Revision
Beyond FY 26
TOTALSFY 07 - FY 11 FY 12 - FY 16 FY 17 - FY 21 FY 22 - FY 26
Project and Priority Plan - Revisions -May 2006
ATTACHMENT C
PROS Project and Priority Plan
Response to Questions and Requests from City Council
City Council Questions and Requests
1. Lane County Commissioners have indicated concerns regarding projects that reach
beyond Eugene’s Urban Growth Boundary. What are the jurisdictional issues?
Currently, the City of Eugene can, and does, own property outside of its city
limits and urban growth boundary. For example, the Eugene Airport and many
segments of the Ridgeline Park system are located outside of the City’s limits.
When acquiring and developing property that lies outside of Eugene’s
jurisdiction, the City is required to follow the zoning and land use regulations of
the appropriate governing jurisdictions.
Adoption of the Project and Priority Plan does not amount to the City exercising
any governmental authority outside of the UGB or outside of the City’s limits.
As noted in the PROS Comprehensive Plan, the document has no regulatory
effect on land not under the City’s jurisdictional authority. Neither the PROS
Comprehensive Plan or the Project and Priority Plan are intended to have any
legal or regulatory effect for land located outside City limits. They are
strategy/planning documents that are intended as a guide for the City as it
moves forward to meet the recreational and park needs of the City’s residents.
2. Include within the text of the Project and Priority Plan an additional discussion
regarding the flexibility of the plan. This discussion should include how projects and
identified priorities can be modified to respond to individual circumstances.
The following text has been added to section C, page 3 of the Project and Priority
Plan:
“The Project and Priority Plan is intended to be a living document, and as such,
individual projects may be delayed if funding cannot be identified within the
shown timeline. Likewise, individual projects may be moved forward if funding
is identified earlier than shown in the timeline. As challenges and opportunities
arise in the future, City Council can amend the Project and Priority Plan by
Council Resolution. This process may be initiated by a direct Council action, as
part of the annual budget process, or in association with periodic System
Development Charge methodology updates.”
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Council Response Page 1
3. Respond to public hearing comments regarding:
Ridgeline property acquisition south of Moon Mountain (McDougal Property).
?
The Project and Priority Plan contains a Ridgeline Trail project titled
“Acquire natural areas to complete Moon Mountain to Spencer Butte
segment” This project encompasses the area described in the public
hearing testimony. $1,625,000 is identified for acquisition in priority 1,
with an additional $1,625,000 identified in priority 2.
The Project and Priority Plan
Riverfront bikepath acquisition in Willakenzie.
?
calls for acquisition of a linear park along both the east and west sides of
the Willamette River, extending from the current bikepath system north of
Beltline to the confluence of the McKenzie River. This proposal is also
identified in the Central Area Transportation Study Bikeways Plan.
The Project and Priority
Jefferson Amazon Greenway project implementation.
?
Plan formerly listed this project as a priority 3. Based on public testimony,
this priority ranking has been upgraded to a split priority ranking. This
includes $60,000 in priority 1 for a feasibility study and the remaining
implementation dollars in priority 2. It is anticipated that this project will
be coordinated with the Metro Waterways study currently underway in
partnership with the Army Corp of Engineers.
. Staff is
Placement of an emergency call box at Golden Gardens Park
?
researching the costs and feasibility of installing a solar-powered cellular
phone call box at Golden Gardens. Purchase and installation will cost
$6,000- $8,000.
4. What dollar amount was allocated to Friendly Park in the previous CIP budget?
What was actually spent? And what is proposed for additional Friendly Park
proposed for phase 2?
Friendly Park has an $80,000 budget from 1998 bond measure funds, and as
identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. These funds are insufficient to do a
complete renovation of the park. As a result, improvements will be phased in
over time. Phase one improvements will be constructed this summer and fall
and will be focused on play area improvements. Specific improvements will at a
minimum include; replacement and relocation of the swing set, replacement of
safety surfacing, construction of concrete edging around the play area, including
an ADA access ramp, and bench upgrades. Additional improvements which are
desired in phase one and will be constructed if funding allows include;
additional plantings and site furnishings, and a drinking fountain.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Council Response Page 2
Plans for phase two improvements include an expanded play area, an extended
path system, signage, a small central gathering space with picnic tables, and
potentially a picnic shelter. Phase two improvements are given a priority one
ranking in the Project and Priority Plan with a $100,000 budget.
5. Provide clarification on the growth allocation percentages, specifically address:
. All of the
Testimony regarding existing deficiencies of neighborhood parkland
?
growth allocation percentages, including that for neighborhood park land
acquisition, are derived based on a capacity needs analysis. Growth
allocations are based on examination of system-wide capacity using
examination of the future LOS resulting from the proposed Project Plan,
with land acquisition and park development levels of service evaluated
separately. In the case of neighborhood park land acquisition, the future
LOS resulting from the projects in the proposed Project Plan is slightly less
than the existing level of service. After allocating existing neighborhood
park land to meet the needs of the existing population, all of
neighborhood park land acquisition in the Project Plan is needed to meet
the capacity needs of growth. A system-wide analysis and the simplifying
assumption that capacity needs of the existing population are met first by
the existing parks inventory avoids the complexity of an analysis of the
exact location of individual parks and park service areas in relation to the
exact location of individual developments. If capacity in existing parks
were allocated to both existing users and growth, the value of growth’s
share of existing park capacity would need to be recovered through a
reimbursement fee SDC. The capacity analysis used is less complex and
relies on fewer assumptions while the net effect is anticipated to be
generally cost-neutral, both to growth and the existing community.
The
Will SDC’s be charged for projects outside of the Urban Growth Boundary?
?
Project and Priority Plan includes projects which are located outside of
Eugene’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). When identifying parcels for
park acquisition, the preference is on obtaining properties that are in close
proximity to residents, and therefore within Eugene’s UGB. However,
there are some instances when it may become necessary to look outside of
the UGB. For example, it is a goal of the PROS Comprehensive Plan to
provide a variety of outdoor experiences for Eugene residents, including
the rural, natural qualities that one encounters in the Ridgeline Park
system. Additionally, there may be times when the type and size of
parcels which are sought to provide specific park services are not
available within the UGB because of previous development. Because
these projects are intended to provide park services to City residents,
SDC’s can be collected for growth’s share of the proposed projects.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Council Response Page 3
The
Clarify which project list will be adopted in the Project and Priority Plan.
?
Project and Priority Plan proposed for adoption by Council is attached as
Exhibit A to the proposed resolution. Adoption of this plan includes the
text associated with the plan as well as the tables and maps contained
within it. There has been confusion about additional lists which have
been provided to Council to help clarify questions around growth
allocation percentages. These lists are for informational purposes and are
not proposed for adoption. The System Development Charge
methodology for Parks and Open Space is currently under review and
will be brought before Council later this year.
6.
Provide additional information on the funding assumptions used to distribute
projects over the 20 year planning window of the Project and Priority Plan.
The Project and Priority Plan anticipates use of a combination of existing
resources and new revenues. All estimates of revenue are in FY-06 dollars and
have not been adjusted for anticipated inflation.
1998 Park Bond – $2.3 million in FY-07. This funding is identified to complete
the projects remaining from the 1998 Park Bond. After FY-07 this funding source
is anticipated to be exhausted.
Donations / Grants – $350,000 average per year through FY-11 and then raising
to $500,000 per year for the remaining 15 years of the plan. The history of grants
and donations as a revenue source varies greatly over the past 5 years from lows
of approximately $325,000 to highs of approximately $1.5 million. We anticipate
the newly created Park Foundation to further support outreach and generation of
additional opportunities for donations and grants. Donation and grant funds are
typically constrained to be used only for the purpose identified by the donor or
in the grant.
Land Partnerships - $650,000 average per year through FY-26 in partner funded
land acquisitions. Building on a very successful partnership in West Eugene
with the BLM and the Nature Conservancy, it is anticipated that these as well as
other partnership opportunities will continue to further open space acquisition
efforts. These partnerships are critical in meeting the overall open space vision
for the Eugene area with regards to West Eugene, the Ridgeline Trail System,
and the Willamette and McKenzie Rivers.
Other City Funds - $200,000 average per year through FY- 26. Some projects
identified in the project list have multiple benefits and may be able to draw from
other City sources such as Stormwater and Transportation designated funds.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Council Response Page 4
Parks System Development Funds – $1.5 million average per year. Current
revenues for this fund are approximately $1.5 million annually but can vary
widely based on the level of building activity. Also, this fund is currently under
review for methodology update. Assumptions anticipating the result of that
update have not been included. Park System Development funding is
constrained to those projects that provide park services for new growth.
2006 Park Bond - $5 million average per year starting FY-08 and ending FY-12.
City Council has requested staff to prepare a bond measure for the November
2006 ballot with projects focused on parkland acquisition, the West Eugene
Environmental Education Center, and synthetic sports field development in
partnership with local school districts.
Future Park Bonds (or other new revenue source) - $5.3 million average per year
starting FY13 and continuing through 2026. Providing this level of funding to
2026 may require multiple bond measures depending on the amount of bonding
per occurrence or other new revenue that may be identified. It is assumed that
this bond(s) would be a non-constrained measure providing funding for various
park services.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Council Response Page 5
ATTACHMENT D
PROS Project and Priority Plan
Response to Public Testimony
A public hearing on the Project and Priority Plan was held before City Council
on April 10, 2006. Twenty-one individuals testified in person at the public
hearing, many of whom also submitted written testimony. The public record
was left open for one additional week, closing on April 17, 2006. An additional
forty-one individuals submitted written testimony regarding the Project and
Priority Plan.
Response to testimony is grouped into the following categories:
?
Specific project advocacy
?
System development charge related questions
?
Jurisdictional issues
Specific Project Advocacy
Golden Gardens
(
Diane Shock, Mary Monette, Shauna Davis, Gary Davis, Sheryl Davis, Shanon Davis,
Brenda Hansen, Lenore Davis-Woods, Carol Dower, Ruth Anne Paul, Deborah Craig,
Anthony Johnson, Amanda Cantwell, Justin Huelsman, Gabrielle Williams, Liz Hayes,
Britnee Klopp, Brandee Rhodes, Troy Richey, Brittany Noelle Burian, Travis Jones,
Brittany Blake, Alec Meadows, McKenzie Sheherd-Davis, Blake Crawford, Taylor
Hawke, Jessica Lovell, Kali Rescigno, Breuna Germyn, Bryce Englehardt, Brittainy
Wilson, Alyssa Lujan, Brandon McGinnis, Keir Tasa)
Friends of Golden Gardens Park testified and presented ideas for Golden Gardens Park.
The group is requesting priority one status for the acquisition and development of Golden
Gardens Park. The initial priority improvements include: a feasibility plan for
determining the best course of action for future development, acquisition of a 100 foot
buffer around the ponds to allow room to lessen the steep slopes of the pond banks, and
park development to make the area more frequented by users of all ages.
Additional testimony related to Golden Gardens Park includes the following issues and
suggestions: Initiate a public education campaign; acquire additional property prior to
adjacent development; improve pedestrian and vehicle access; develop the park for
increased recreation; install no-swimming signs, floatation devices, and an emergency
phone. The question was also raised whether the site could be considered a public
nuisance under City Code.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 1
Prairie Mountain School 8 graders offered their assistance and submitted written
th
testimony. Comments and suggestions include: improving safety and educating people
about dangers; installing a memorial; cleaning-up water and vegetation; making a garden
and planting trees; installing signs, barbeque pits, a playground, sandbox, picnic tables,
benches, garbage cans, trails, basketball courts, a swimming pool, turf, and fencing; re-
sloping the pond banks, creating emergency access, filling the ponds with cement or dirt,
and stocking the ponds with fish.
Staff Response: A memorandum to City Council was included in the April 27
th
packet which responded specifically to ideas for Golden Gardens Park which
were submitted by the Friends of Golden Gardens. As a result of public
testimony, projects related to Golden Gardens Park have been given a higher
priority.
$2,000,000 for acquisition of property surrounding the park was originally
?
a priority 3. As a result of public testimony, $200,000 has been moved into
priority 1 and the remaining $1,800,000 has been moved to priority 2.
$3,600,000 for development of the park was originally identified in
?
priority 5. As a result of public testimony, $500,000 has been moved to
priority 2 and the remaining $3,100,000 has been moved to priority 3.
These revised priorities will allow acquisition of a 100’ band on the east, west,
and north ends of the park in priority 1. This acquisition will allow for future re-
grading of the ponds to lessen the slopes. The remaining acquisition associated
with Golden Gardens is given a priority 2 with development occurring in
priority 2 and 3.
Sports Fields
(Joel Anderson, Regional Coach Administrator for Eugene American Youth Soccer
Organization (AYSO); Julia Pommert; Nancy Pollard; Jurgen Ruckaberle, youth soccer
coach (kidsports, OUSA, EMFC); Chuck Tilby, Eugene resident; Lorna Roberts; Evon
Smith, President Eugene Metro Futbol Club; Mark Bassett, parent; Eugene 4J School
District)
The Eugene School District submitted testimony requesting joint development of
synthetic turf fields at Madison and Cal Young middle schools. The District would like
the City to fund installation of lights and bleachers, and assist with field maintenance
and operating costs.
A number of sports enthusiasts – particularly youth and adult soccer advocates – also
testified in favor of new synthetic turf fields. Much of the testimony concerned a
perceived lack of available fields and inadequate maintenance on the school fields. Some
requested the purchase of additional fields, in the form of synthetic turf fields to meet all-
weather field space needs, while others testified that upgrading existing athletic fields to
artificial turf would be sufficient.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 2
Staff Response: As a result of public testimony and Council direction related to a
proposed parks bond measure in 2006, an additional project has been added to
the Project and Priority Plan. This project identifies $4,000,000 in priority 1 for
development of synthetic surface fields in partnership with school districts
Eugene 4J and Bethel 52. An additional $1,000,000 is identified in priority 1 for
the City’s share of replacement costs for the synthetic surfacing of the 4 existing
synthetic surface fields. An additional $1,500,000 has also been added to this
project to cover the City’s share of replacement costs of the proposed synthetic
field surfaces approximately 10 - 15 years after installation.
Alton Baker Whitewater Park/ Habitat Restoration
(Ed Fredette, UO Outdoor Program; David Sonnichson, Whilamut Natural Area Citizen
Planning Committee Chair; Anna Hopt; Scott Bridgham, UO Environmental Studies
Professor; Rob McKenzie, SEHS student)
A petition with 114 signatures was submitted as part of testimony in favor of the
renovation of the Alton Baker Canoe Canal into a whitewater park. Five individuals
testified in favor of a Whitewater park, noting potential for funding partnerships and
economic development, while integrating habitat restoration efforts and safety
improvements into the project.
Staff Response: This project was previously given a priority 2 ranking in the
Project and Priority Plan. In response to public testimony, this ranking has been
split into phase 1 and phase 2. $100,000 has been moved into priority one to fund
a feasibility study. This study will provide an informed scope of work, while
identifying potential partner funding opportunities.
Ridgeline Trail
?
Land Acquisition (Bruce Mullligan, Hendricks Hills Homeowners Association; Azra
Khalidi)
Oral and written testimony was submitted in strong support of acquisition of the 120
acre McDougal parcel connecting Moon Mountain to Hendricks Park as part of an
upcoming bond measure. Another individual requested that more areas in south Eugene
be designated as parkland, noting the need for cooperation with the county.
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan contains a Ridgeline Trail project
titled “Acquire natural areas to complete Moon Mountain to Spencer Butte
segment” This project encompasses the area described in the public hearing
testimony. $1,625,000 is identified for acquisition in priority 1, with an additional
$1,625,000 identified in priority 2.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 3
?
Mountain Bike skill riding (Anthony Beck; Mike Dials; Scott Taylor)
Three individuals testified in support of ridgeline acquisition to include mountain bike
amenities such as a mountain bike skill riding park.
Staff Response: Approximately $9,250,000 and over 900 acres of additional
ridgeline trail acquisition is identified in the Project and Priority Plan as priority
1 and 2 Projects. A specific project item titled, “Develop mountain biking trails
and freeriding designated areas” is given a priority 5 ranking. Staff are currently
working with mountain biking constituents to find a location which is
appropriate for the type of skill riding facility which is requested. Once an
agreed upon location is identified, partnership opportunities to develop the
facilities may occur prior to the existing designated time frame. Additional
projects related to mountain biking opportunities include development of
primary ridgeline trails, currently priority 3 and 4. Many of these trails will be
designed and constructed to accommodate mountain bikes.
Land Acquisition
(David Monk, Vice President of Southeast Neighbors; Kate Perle)
On behalf of the South East Neighbors , one individual provided oral testimony in
general support for a land acquisition bond measure and the need to move forward with
the project list, as well as their preference for grass fields rather than synthetic turf.
Additional written testimony was submitted in favor of fully funding land acquisition as
the top priority of a bond measure, requesting that the bond measure be expanded if
additional projects are to be included.
Staff Response: Land Acquisition for neighborhood parks and natural areas is
given a high priority ranking in the Project and Priority Plan.
Jefferson Amazon Greenway
(David Hinkley, John Belcher)
Two individuals requested an increase in priority for the Jefferson Greenway project,
currently listed as Priority 3, to capitalize on current partnership opportunities.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 4
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan formerly listed this project as a
priority 3. Based on public testimony, this priority ranking has been upgraded to
a split priority ranking. This includes $60,000 in priority 1 for a feasibility study
and the remaining implementation dollars in priority 2. It is anticipated that this
project will be coordinated with the Metro Waterways study currently underway
in partnership with the Army Corp of Engineers.
Riverfront Acquisition
(Charles Biggs)
One individual provided testimony advocating for Willakenzie area riverfront land
acquisition projects identified in the Project and Priority Plan. In particular, providing
bicycle access to Armitage State Park was supported.
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan calls for acquisition of a linear park
along both the east and west sides of the Willamette River, extending from the
current bikepath system north of Beltline to the confluence of the McKenzie
River. This proposal is also identified in the Central Area Transportation Study
Bikeways Plan.
Striker Fields
(Charles Biggs)
A request was made to remove the Striker Field sports complex from the project list; the
individual feels that there are adequate sports park facilities in the area and that
acquisition for active recreation should be balanced with passive, habitat-based land
acquisition.
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan identifies $5,000,000 for the
development of Striker Fields as a priority 3 project. Options are being discussed
for the development of this property with School District 4J who owns the
property immediately to the west of the City’s parcel. It is both the City’s and
the School District’s hope that a collaborative plan can be reached to meet the
needs of a new school in this area, while also addressing the recreational needs of
the community and the neighborhood.
The PROS Comprehensive Planning Process clearly identified a need for
additional athletic fields, particularly in a multi-field setting. A number of
strategies in the PROS Plan emphasize this need with regards to accommodating
tournament play, league play, and realizing maintenance and programming
efficiencies.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 5
Downtown Covered Skatepark
(Bob Chandler, owner of Tactics Boardshop)
Two individuals submitted testimony in favor of the PROS project to develop a covered,
centrally located skatepark facility, advocating for its placement in Washington-Jefferson
Park. The testimony included reference to a previously submitted petition in support of
the skatepark signed by over 1,600 local residents.
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan identifies $200,000 for this project
with a priority 1 ranking.
System Development Charge related questions
(Roxie Cuellar, Director of Government Affairs for Home Builders Association of Lane
County; Doug Weber, SDC Rates Advisory Committee member)
A member of the SDC Rates Advisory Committee testified that the amount of land to be
acquired seems excessive and reduces the residential land inventory, recommending the
list be ‘trimmed down’ or ‘broken into parts’ to be implemented as non-SDC funding is
secured.
Written comments were submitted by Roxie Cuellar of the Home Builders Association of
Lane County related to preliminary growth allocation figures in the Project Plan and in
additional information and clarification related to growth allocation percentages. Staff
had provided this additional information to the Mayor and City Council both in advance
of the public hearing and as requested following a February 27, 2006 council work
session. Key points and concerns expressed in the comments included:
Acknowledgement that the project list contains all of the elements required by
?
SDC-related statutes.
Park acquisition for natural area parks includes acreage which is anticipated to be
?
funded by other agencies.
Contention that natural area park projects beyond the 20-year planning horizon
?
are allocated to growth.
Concern that the growth allocation percentages for Neighborhood park land
?
acquisition are not based on capacity needs of growth.
Proposal to use the planning target Level of Service (LOS) contained in the
?
PROS Comprehensive Plan as the basis for growth allocation.
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan anticipates that certain projects are
likely to involve partnerships with other agencies in terms of funding and land
acquisition. While the results of such projects affect the existing and future parks
level of service, funding through grants and by other agencies is typically
excluded when calculating SDC rates. For this reason, staff provided a
clarification of acres of park included in the project list that are anticipated to be
subject to the growth allocation percentages as reflected in a column labeled
“Acquisition Acres Net of Partner Funded” in Table A attached to Ms. Cuellar’s
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 6
comment and previously provided to the Mayor and Council. The growth
allocation percentages provided in the Project and Priority Plan are reflective of
the LOS provided by projects in the plan over the Plan’s 20-year planning
horizon. If projected LOS and acres of parks is revised in the future due to
changes in projected partner funding an update to the Project Plan, growth
allocation percentages and SDC will be completed to account for these changes.
The Project and Priority Plan also includes projects, including some natural area
park projects, which are anticipated to serve the needs of the community beyond
the 20-year planning horizon. While these projects were recognized by the
community as important to fulfill Eugene’s vision for future parks and open
space, they are not prioritized for funding in the next 20 years. These projects are
included in priority 5. The level of service and capacity needs analysis used in
deriving the growth allocations includes only those park acres and costs which
will serve the community during the 20-year planning horizon. In developing
the growth allocation and SDC rates, none of the projects listed in priority 5 are
allocated to anticipated growth within the planning horizon.
All of the growth allocation percentages, including that for neighborhood park
land acquisition, are derived based on a capacity needs analysis. As previously
explained, growth allocations are based on examination of system-wide capacity
using examination of the future LOS resulting from the proposed Project Plan,
with land acquisition and park development levels of service evaluated
separately. In the case of neighborhood park land acquisition, the future LOS
resulting from the projects in the proposed Project Plan is slightly less than the
existing level of service. After allocating existing neighborhood park land to
meet the needs of the existing population, all of neighborhood park land
acquisition in the Project Plan is needed to meet the capacity needs of growth. A
system-wide analysis and the simplifying assumption that capacity needs of the
existing population are met first by the existing parks inventory avoids the
complexity of an analysis of the exact location of individual parks and park
service areas in relation to the exact location of individual developments. If
capacity in existing parks were allocated to both existing users and growth, the
value of growth’s share of existing park capacity would need to be recovered
through a reimbursement fee SDC. The capacity analysis used is less complex
and relies on fewer assumptions while the net effect is anticipated to be generally
cost-neutral, both to growth and the existing community.
Growth allocation percentages must consider the capacity provided in the
system by projects in the Project and Priority Plan rather than conceptual
planning targets contained in PROS Comprehensive Plan document. The future
LOS and capacity in the parks system is most accurately identified by the result
of combining the existing parks inventory with the parks and facilities added by
projects in the Project Plan. Use of the LOS planning analysis reflected in Table
B-1 of the PROS Comprehensive Plan to determine growth allocation
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 7
percentages is less accurate and more speculative than use of a LOS and capacity
analysis derived from the projects in the Project Plan.
Jurisdictional Issues
(Debbie Jeffries)
One individual noted that the PROS inventory includes city property only and should
include partner funded acres (1,500 acres BLM land). The individual also requested
“county projects” (those outside the urban growth boundary) be removed from the project
list.
Staff Response: The Project and Priority Plan does not contain an inventory of
existing resources. This inventory is contained in the PROS Comprehensive Plan
which was adopted by City Council on February 13, 2006. This issue was also
brought up during the approval process of the PROS Comprehensive Plan. The
following response was provided at that time.
There are numerous agencies and private entities which own land within
Eugene’s Urban Growth Boundary and provide recreation opportunities to
Eugene residents. These providers include:
School Districts 4J and 52;
?
The University of Oregon;
?
Eugene Water and Electric Board;
?
Lane County;
?
River Road Parks and Recreation District; and
?
Privately owned recreation providers such as golf courses and tennis clubs.
?
There is no guarantee that lands owned by the above mentioned entities will
remain in perpetuity as public open space and/or recreation facilities. Although
these providers are part of a system which contributes to the parks, recreation
and open space services of the area, only lands which are actually owned by the
City of Eugene are included in the PROS Comprehensive Plan inventory.
The following agencies own land within Eugene’s Urban Growth Boundary that
is protected in perpetuity as open space through funding mechanisms or
conservation easements:
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and
?
The Nature Conservancy (TNC).
?
The Nature Conservancy owns 415 acres of land within Eugene’s UGB which is
protected open space. While TNC does not restrict public use at this time, it does
not facilitate public use, and has the ability to restrict use in the future. The BLM
owns 742 acres of land within Eugene’s UGB which is available for public use.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 8
It is typical of Parks and Open Space planning processes to only incorporate
lands which are owned and therefore controlled by the individual jurisdiction.
The inclusion of private recreation facilities complicates the inventory of lands
and resources because the mission of a private facility owner is often different
than that of a municipality. In the case of both Willamalane Park and Recreation
District and the City of Portland, inventory acreages are limited to those lands
which are owned by the jurisdictions. School facilities are included in the facility
analysis, but the acreage is not included. This is consistent with Eugene’s
methodology.
With regards to the issue of projects located outside of Eugene’s Urban Growth
Boundary, currently, the City of Eugene can, and does, own property outside of
its city limits and urban growth boundary. For example, the Eugene Airport and
many segments of the Ridgeline Park system are located outside of the City’s
limits. When acquiring and developing property that lies outside of Eugene’s
jurisdiction, the City is required to follow the zoning and land use regulations of
the appropriate governing jurisdictions.
Adoption of the Project and Priority Plan does not amount to the City exercising
any governmental authority outside of the UGB or outside of the City’s limits.
As noted in the PROS Comprehensive Plan, the document has no regulatory
effect on land not under the City’s jurisdictional authority. Neither the PROS
Comprehensive Plan or the Project and Priority Plan are intended to have any
legal or regulatory effect for land located outside City limits. They are
strategy/planning documents that are intended as a guide for the City as it
moves forward to meet the recreational and park needs of the City’s residents.
Project and Priority Plan- May 8, 2006
Public Testimony Response Page 9
WEISS Carolyn J
ATTACHMENT E
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
MEDLIN Johnny R
Monday, April 10, 2006 3:53 PM
WEISS Carolyn J
FW: Golden Gardens Park
-----Original Message-----
From: Diane Shock [mailto:globalgravy@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 3:51 PM
To: MEDLIN Johnny R
Subject: Golden Gardens Park
Johnny, here is a copy of the email I'm sending to the
budget committee.
Diane Shock
April 10, 2006
To
Subject:
Budget Committee
Golden Gardens Park
There have been too many drownings at Golden Gardens
Park in the past few years. Active Bethel Citizens
and the City of Eugene can no longer ignore this fact.
We need to make Golden Gardens safe for all citizens.
We feel that attracting more citizens to the park will
help eliminate unsupervised activity. To attract more
citizens to the park we need to increase access and
positive recreational opportunities. To increase
access and positive recreational opportunities we need
to have Golden Gardens Park moved to a priority 1 and
we need funding for a study to determine how we can
best accomplish the development of our park.
An important component of development of this park
will be acquisition of additional land around the
ponds. Immediate acquisition of a minimum 100 ft.
around the perimeter of the large western pond will
allow for the sloping of the pond's edges to safely
accommodate access and fishing.
Additional acreage needs to be secured while the
surrounding land is undeveloped. Once development
begins, this opportunity will cease to exist. By
moving this project to a priority 1 and fast tracking
the development process, Golden Gardens will take it's
place among Eugene's other parks and open spaces as a
safe recreational experience for all citizens. By
becoming a much safer recreational park Golden Gardens
will minimize the possibility of future tragedies
Creating safe environments for recreation within the
City of Eugene is all of our responsibility and we
must accept it and act on it.
1
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Larry and Diane Shock
2
,-
b, CMte.- 'Sh ock-
f\.)":} t^)L- f-tXv~
\...\\ to\ Dip
Active Bethel Citizen~ (3/16/06) and GGP committee (3/20/06)
Ideas on Golden Garden Park
Note: On 3/27/06 the xx participants were given 15 dots @ to indicate those ideas
they felt were most worth further work. Ideas have been re-ordered accordingly.
Ideas in italics have already been done or are underway.
A. PROS Proiect Plan priorities and funding
1. Move development of the park ahead -less than 10 years. 20 dots.
2. Purchase 100 acres around the park as part of the November Bond
Measure. 10 dots.
3. Appropriate design funding and/or feasibility study of park ($30K). 7
dots.
4. Research/apply for federal grant funds for safety improvements. 3
dots.
5. Appropriate construction funding
6. Consider purchase of approx. 100ft. strip along west side (or get
easement)
B. Access to park in general
1. Open the road to all- have more families use the park so that they
can look out for each other. 11 dots.
2. Have (more than one) key for the gate for emergency access. 7 dots.
3. Parks supply a key for new bridge access to neighborhood watch
responsible individual. 2 dots.
4. Install access bridge for emergency vehicle use (Estimated Sept 2006
completion). Not considered for a dot as it is already being done.
5. Build a 2-way bridge instead of a one-way bridge.
6. Fence off the entire park until it can be made safe.
7. If the City can't afford to maintain the park, sell it to someone who can.
C. Public information
L Use the slang name the kids use for the park, "the pits", in public
information targeted to that audience. 9 dots.
2. Educate children of the dangers of the ponds through local schools.
7 dots.
3. Use the ABC newsletter to remind all neighbors of the danger.
Include contact information of Council and staff. 3 dots.
4. Have a booth about water safety/ponds at the WE ARE BETHEL
celebration at Petersen Barn in Early June. 3 dots.
5. Promote the other, positive uses of the park area. 3 dots.
6. Hand out leaflets at nearby schools (with instructions to take home to
parents) that describe past loss of life and current dangers. 2 dots.
7. Outreach/education efforts at Willamette High SchooL 1 dot.
8. Recognize that junior and senior high school students are more
independent and have more unsupervised time. Is there information
"'.
from the schools targeting this audience? (Bethel School District
Answer: not a systematic approach at this time.) 1 dot.
9. Use this topic for the Shasta Middle School poster program. 1 dot.
10. Notify new neighbors.
11. Set up a meeting at the site for interested parents so they can learn about
the park and its dangers and make their own informed decisions.
12. Include in public information for parents both names so they know that the
pits = ponds.
13. Circulate information through the Register-Guard to neighborhood in area
of park or larger area.
14. Ask the kids why the ponds are so attractive.
D.
Signage
1. Install a sign that says: NO SWIMMING. 12 dots.
2. Be more explicit about the danger. Make it personal. Use the names
of those who have died there. Add crosses to the signs to show where
lives were lost. 6 dots. .
3. Make signs in red-this is a color kids associate with danger. 6 dots.
4. Signs should have a warning about the danger. Just posting the depth
of the ponds encourages swimming. 3 dots.
5. Have a sign that says Fishing Only. 3 dots.
6. Post the Park Rules more prominently (currently small signs at each
common entrance). 3 dots.
7. Besides saying how deep the water is, include information about the
danger and past deaths. 2 dots.
8. Clearly post name of park at all entrances. 1 dot.
9. Rename the park. 1 dot.
10. Name each pond and display the name on the signs so people can give
emergency personnel more specific information if they need to call for
help. (Note: Mark shared that the ponds have been named and this
information is on the signs.) Not consideredfor a dot as'already done.
11. Need signs that adults can reference when they are encouraging safe
behavior at the park.
-
E. Maintenance/enhancement of the ponds
1. Fill the northeast pond bottom, so water level is at 2 t03 feet instead of
16 to 27 feet. 12 dots
2. Designate specific uses for each pond (e.g., fIShing, swimming). 7 dots.
i. It's the small pond that's the biggest danger.
3. Slope the sides of the ponds (regulatory question). 6 dots.
4. Fund a diver to document problems within the ponds such as vegetation,
garbage, water clarity. (Sheriff's divers did this last year on the NE pond,
scheduledfor this summer on the main and south ponds.) Not considered
for a dot as already being done.
5. Need a way at the edge of the ponds to help people get out.
,r-. "',\
~.l }
1-",
6. Vegetation and garbage too dense in the ponds - problem hidden
underneath (Invasive vegetation removed in South pond'last summer.)
7. Stock ponds with vegetation-eating fish (Not allowed: must be able to
contain the fish).
8. Add lights to the bottom of the ponds (may be difficult w/ depth, mud).
9. Drain, the ponds (regulatory question).
10. Install netting or a platform on the side of the ponds.
F. Swimming
1. Encourage swimming at other facilities (e.g., Echo Hollow Pool).
4 dots.
2. Swimming lessons good idea, but not enough.
3. Pass a park-specific rule against swimming (recognizing CE cannot
enforce such a rule)
G. Public Safety services/laws
1. More practice for Fire/EMS crews on getting to and around the park.
16 dots.
2. Before school is out, do water safety education for kids. 4 dots.
3. Promote participation in City's Water Safety Day (6/24).3 dots.
4. POS and Bethel School District sponsor two weeks of Water Safety
training at Echo Hollow Pool for 6th ~raders. 3 dots.
i. CE has researched option for 3r graders, city-wide.
5. Make it a law that youth wear life jackets in water.
6. Then enforce the law that youth wear life jackets in water.
7. Increase police patrol.
8. Hold water safety and CPR classes for families.
9. Take kids to site to show water safety dangers.
H. Park amenities
1. Install an emergency call box at the site. 14 dots.
2. Walking path/trail around the circumference of the park. 9 dots.
3. Install a kiosk wI map of park and bulletin board. 7 dots.
4. Add storage for emergency flotation devices, and instructions on how
to use. 5 dots.
5. Put gravel roads around the ponds. 2 dots.
'6. Provide foot access (e.g., pedestrian paths) between the ponds. 1 dot.
7. Add a parking area new near bridge (10 cars?) 1 dot.
8. Put in a port-a-potty. 2 dots. ,
9. Put afootbridge over the canal (Estimated completion date: May 2006)
10. Installpicnic tables, more trash cans (2 tables, 1 can installed March
2006)
11. Fence the West side
12. Plant trees
(~
.
.
I. Volunteer possibilities
1. Create a Friends of Golden Gardens Park to patrol and create a
presence in the park. 7 dots.
2. Organize a volunteer program for annual clean-up/maintenance of
the park. 3 dots.
3. Get donations of materials/supplies from local businesses. 2 dots.
4. Work with LC Search and Rescue Diving Group (John Miller, 682-
8544, 913-2600). 2 dots.
5. Establish/work with nearby Neighborhood Watch group. 2 dots.
6. Coordinate with other volunteer groups for maintenance (e.g., dog
trainers). 1 dot.
7. Nearby residents post signs in their yards wi positive messages on park
use.
8. Build some trails in the park.
9. NeighborWoods program (plant CE-provided trees, water for first 3 years)
J. Add features for other uses in the parks (especially Adults)
1. Stock ponds with fish to develop f'lShing aspect. 13 dots.
2. Sponsor nature/safety walks for families. 6 dots.
3. Develop natural reserves/features. 3 dots.
4. Wildlife appreciation events. 1 dot.
5. Summer kick-off event. 1 dot.
6. Combine a recreation event with a volunteer event.
Questions needing follow-up w/ POS:
1. How often and what maintenance services are. currently provided to the park?
2. How does the City remove the aquatic vegetation?
3. How are the ponds connected? Are there any springs feeding the ponds?
What causes the current?
4. What is the state of the water quality in the ponds?
5. What kind of warning signage can be allowed?
6. Check with Fish & Wildlife on the possibility of stocking the ponds.
7. What is the relation of the County's Rivers to Ridges plan with the PROS Plan
and Project list? (e.g., R-to-R describes Golden Garden Park development as
"short term")
(Y)
Apri/10, 2006 Golden Gardens Park Public Forum
Testimony
Hello, I am Mary Monette at 3261 Richard Avenue in the Bethel
neighborhood and I am the co-chair of Friends of Golden
Gardens Park.
Friends of Golden Gardens Park began less than one month
ago at a meeting of the Active Bethel Citizens. Three mothers
whose boys drowned in the northeast pond spoke to us about
the unsafe conditions at this park and their determination to
prevent more deaths. I went there with the assumption that
these boys weren't supervised or couldn't swim, what I learned
was that because of the inaccessibility of the park it was not
frequented by many adults and was an unregulated haven for
kids.
Friends of Golden Gardens Park are a very dynamic, cohesive
group that has made outstanding progress. Our goal is to
prevent the drowning of one more child in these ponds and to
make this a park both the Bethel area and the city can be proud
of. After our initial ABC meeting we met at the park with Johnny
Medlin, the director of parks and open spaces. The
inaccessibility of this park for rescuers and adults is a huge
factor in the previous drownings thus a one lane bridge is to be
built by the end of summer. Because one of our main goals is
to increase adult traffic in the park Johnny agreed to build a
temporary footbridge over the canal, install picnic tables &
garbage cans - all of which he has already done.
C0
With the help of parks & recreation staff, neighborhood
organizers, city firefighters, and councilor Jennifer Solomom, we
have developed a strong plan which you have ~ copy of. We
must fund a feasibility study. We must purchase significant
acreage to slope the banks of the ponds to enhance safety.
We need a public education campaign to increase awareness
of the ponds and their dangers. We must move the
development of the park to be much sooner than 20 years.
The Bethel area is rapidly expanding and the areas to develop
parks are decreasing. Golden Gardens Park could be a
destination park for all of Eugene with fishing ponds, nature
trails, ball fields and a community center. We are not asking
you to do this work alone - we are a committed group and we
are excited to help you push this project forward NOW.
/1:)
Message
Page 1 0[2
WEISS Carolyn J
From: COREY Kurt A
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 20061:12 PM
To: MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: Golden Gardens Park
-----Original Message-----
From: TAYLOR Dennis M
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 20069:22 AM
To: COREY Kurt A; JONES Angel L
Cc: MILLER Dawna A
Subject: FW: Golden Gardens Park
FYI--DMT
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary & Kathern [mailto:katmar@castleisp.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:41 PM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Subject: Golden Gardens Park
Dear Mayor Piercy and City Council Members,
I would like to introduce a neighborhood group loosely known
as Friends of Golden Gardens Park. We formed two weeks
ago after listening to the testimony of several mothers whose
sons have drowned at these ponds. I was asked to co-chair
this group with Shauna Davis whose son and nephew both
drowned at the ponds last year. Also present was a mother
whose son drowned approximately 15 years ago. I find it
appalling that the city has seemingly done nothing to make
these ponds safer! There are no "No Swimming" signs, no
public education about the dangers of the extremely steep
sides under water, no vehicular access (until the end of this
summer), to let rescue workers in, no phones in the area... The
list is indeed much longer. In 3 meetings we have assembled
89 written ideas for this 'park' which many in the neighborhood
only know as 'the pits'. Many parents do not even know there
is water there. This is inexcusable and unconscionable.
co
4/1412006
Message
Page 2 of2
As a group we will present the city council with a list of
proposals for this park on April 10th. This park must be
developed now not in 20 years to resolve the above issues.
This would be an excellent place for you as Mayor and City
Councilors to right some very grievous wrongs in the
Bethel/Danebo area.
We continue to meet and will keep you apprised of our efforts,
which are to develop and greatly increase the safety of Golden
Gardens Park.
Sincerely,
Mary Monette
/J)
{..::
4/14/2006
Message
Page 1 of 1
WEISS Carolyn J
From: MEDLIN Johnny R
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 2:10 PM
To: WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: Golden Garden Ponds
FYI... Johnny
-----Original Message--m
From: Woods, Lenore [mailto:lwoods@bethel.k12.0r.us]
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 1:58 PM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Cc: MEDLIN Johnny R
Subject: Golden Garden Ponds
To our Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
I request that the following comments be included as part of the formal record for the City Council meeting of
Monday, April 10, 2006.
The Golden Garden Pond area has long had the potential to become one of the best recreational and natural
parks in the city. Unfortunately, through the years, this area has been repeatedly relegated to the lowest of
priorities. Tragically, this attitude of benign neglect has created an extremely dangerous situation for the Bethel
community, and, in part, contributed to the many factors leading to the deaths of four of the community's youngest
members. One death is a sad and unfortunate occurrence. Two deaths are tragic. Four are inexcusable. You
now have the opportunity to set priorities that can help prevent any more senseless loss of life. Please listen
carefully to the requests presented to you this evening and respond in a wise and compassionate manner.
Sincerely,
Lenore ([)avis-Woods
2642 J{awkins Lane
CEugene, Oregon 97405
:Mi&ffe Sc/ioorq'eac/ier
Prairie :Mountain Sc/ioor
(]Jet/ier Sc/ioor ([)istrict
4/14/2006
From: Kim & Shauna [mailto:kimsha55@hotmail.com)
Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2006 10:13 PM
To: Burgess, Ann; ERIC BRENDA HANSEN; kristi davis; Mary & Kathern; McGillivray, Pat; Sink,
Jennifer; Yarber,JoDee; *Eugene Mayor and City Council; MEDLIN Johnny R; shalyn31@aol.com;
hum & humdinger
Subject: Golden Garden Park
Dear Council & Community Members;
I would like to introduce you to my nephew Britton and my son Nick.
Nick and Britton Swimming the Summer of 2004
We are pleading to our city council to put an end to the an assortment of safety hazards of Golden Garden
Park.
On Fathers Day last year, Nick and Britt, along with their brothers and some neighborhood kids went to the
"Pitts" to go fishing. Little did they know that when they went for that innocent swim to cool off and play in
the North East Pond the vegetation and debris in the water would over take them.
Nick and Britton were experienced swimmers, but tragically the more they fought for their lives the faster they
were pulled into this flooded gravel pit.
They didn't understand that the only way to call for help was their two brothers running as fast as they could
hoping that a nearby fisherman would have a cell phone.
They had no warning that the EMS, Firemen and Police lacked the ability to reach them quick enough because
of the failure of access into and around the park.
Who could of imagined that Lane County Search and Rescue would spend nearly 8 hours attempting to recover
their lifeless bodies from the murky water.
If our boys knew the danger they were attracted to, they would have never risked themselves or anyone else.
/f)
_/
If only they were made aware, they would be alive today.
But they were never given that chance. They drown that Sunday.
I cannot sit back and let another family suffer this immeasurable pain. This is not a part of life we all must learn
to live with.
These problems must be immediately resolved. Each day innocent lives are put in danger.
In the summer of 94' John Emory drown at the age of 17 in the North East Pond at the Pitts. The other kids
gave all they had to try and save him but too much valuable time passed before rescuers could reach John. The
key needed to gain access into the park, and to John, was nowhere to be found. In the end, Eugene Police shot
the lock off the gate to reach him, shortly thereafter John was pronounced dead at the hospital.
The park remained untouched for the next 6 years. Rapidly declining. The only clear difference was the crucial
access bridge at the end of Golden Garden Avenue was destroyed and a guardrail took its place.
That was the summer Ryan Lambert and his brother, along with other neighbor kids, headed down to the
ponds to catch frogs. It was only when his brother began to struggle that Ryan jumped in to help. The
neighbors across the canal heard the screams for 911, but once more it was too late. Ryan drown in the North
East Pond just two weeks before his 13th birthday.
Why is it that 12 years have past and nothing has been done at Golden Gardens Park?
Why is it that 4 lives are ripped from us, that nothing has been done at Golden Gardens Park?
Our city needs to focus on the deceiving conditions at Golden Garden, ftnance the repairs and upgrades
needed, and sustain a safe place for all our citizens, especially when its called a "park".
Over the years, issues have surfaced about the safety concerns and required improvements needed at Golden
Gardens Park.
In 1995, after John drown, Mr. Pat Farr spoke before the council and pointed out the "contradiction in getting
to an unsafe park safely, e.g., Golden Garden Park".
In April 2004 the Community Design Forum decided to "improve paths around ponds for all accessibility
levels" and to "initiate water quality monitoring to ensure swimming and ftshing is safe at Golden Garden".
Those minimal improvements would've prevented the deaths of Nick & Britt.
This seems to be merely an illustration of neglect from our City.
The City of Eugene and the Parks Department have been informed for some time of what needs to be done.
They are completely aware of the hazards that occupy the Pitts.
\Vhich is a lot more than we can say for most of our community and the new residents to the Bethel area.
How is posting signs stating "NO SWIMMING" or "FISHING ONLY" is an added liability?
If City Lawyers advise against such signage, what do they say about the two crosses standing there now? When
actually at least four belong.
/~
~ 1-::)
If you won't tell park patrons not to swim, than at least tell them whose lives have been lost to those ponds.
Maybe then, you might say they were informed.
When will morals come into play? When does the City do what's right just because it's right?
Please, I am begging you, make this a priority number one on the cities agenda.
\Ve have waited, at the bare minimum, twelve years and paid the price of at least four precious lives.
It's only a matter of time before a new family buries another victim of Golden Garden Park.
Thank you for your time and immediate attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Shauna Davis
Nick's Mom & Britton's Aunt
This is our son Corey shortly after he watched his big brother and cousin drown. He has and is experiencing first hand the horror of
Golden Garden Park, or what he knows as "The Pitts". Sadly, there is so many more kids and families going through the same pain and
anguish.
( . ---)
lam .... ....
. and imniediateatt~ntion be gi to the par
in the betheldlstrict of west Eugene. .. . . ..
The development of this park as .it stands, is at least tWenty. years away right..
now, being a class 5 priority, thflt is completely unacceptable with the .
community of bethel aIld other community residents.
Golden garden park, as it stands right now, is nothing more than a hazard and
eyesore to the residents of this community. .
In the last ten years, it has taken"the~ws of at least four of our up coming
citizens. Four young boys have downed in this so called park, just because
they went for a walk to the park, as all children do. Its supposed to be a
pleasant and safe experience for kids to have a place to go and enjoy the
wonders of the outdoors. Not this place, it's a watery grave, waiting to take
its next victim. If left in its present state, It will Shirley be the reaper of
anotper child. There needs to be a.design and impact study done on this city
proposed park right away, which I understand would cost around 30,000.
~ems like that is nothing to pay to start the process of saving the life of one
~'our maybe up coming community leaders. The population in this area of
Eugene is growing at one of the fastest rates in the whole city, everyone,
seems to agree on that. One knows that it is going to continue to grow and we
Ipannot wait till the 12th hr, before deciding we need a park. There is
additional land now available around the park that the city of Eugene needs
to try and acquire or least have an option to insure that the need of future
expansion is available. This issue has been brought to the attention of the city
counsel ~everal tiInes over the years and just seems to be pushed back evelY
time its brought up, now it is time the city step up and take the responsibility
of supporting and doing what they said they would do. when they aquired
these death traps, and named them a park. GOLDEN GARDEN PARK aka
THE PITTS
Thank you for your time; Grandfather of two, of Eugenes young citizens
that will never have the chance to become a community leader.
Respectfully Yours, Gary Davis, (Friends of Golden Garden Park)
1>vb h L (0 'v \"r.-.
'-\h\)\Dlr
Brenda Hansen
979 Laurelhurst
Friends of Golden Gardens Park
And a grieving relative of John Emory who drown at the ponds in 1994.
I went out to these ponds for the first time this week. I can see the attraction. The setting
appeared to picturesque and very inviting, as I was sitting in my car looking out at the
area from the end of golden garden rd.
But looks can be deceiving. Because I know these ponds can and have been very
dangerous. I know these pond were originarug as gravel PITS. I know they have
claimed 4 young lives in the last 12 years ana as the population grows in this area there is
bound to be more ifnothing further is done to make them safer.
What I don't know is how many kids have drown in these ponds in total, I have heard
rumor that there may have been three others. Two being a brother and sister in the seventy
and a girl in the eighties I have not been able to locate the names and dates of these
drowning.
I know lane county owned these ponds until around 1974 when they were deeded to the
city of Eugene. There has been several discussions as to the future of these ponds. But
nothing has been done These pits have been left for decades to fill with water and for
nature to reclaim the area.
Under Eugene code, Chapter 6 section 6.010 Item (b),! an attractive nuisance is defined
as" An open pit, quarry, cistern or others excavation without safeguards or barriers to
prevent such places from being used by children." I feel these pond fit into that category
and will continue to until safeguards are made to make them safer.
This park land has potential, It could be a wonderful park-like setting were the bethel
community can enjoy and be proud of, Like all park projects there will be some monetary
cost.
sY'M.C\1~-\ f\~k~,^r .
Or it could be forgotten again and left ~ until th~ :W year n eMl b~ i mA~d
this too will have a cost, but it will be in the life's of more children. I for one find that
cost unacceptable. Please Don't forget this Park and the life's lost there. Let's do what
need to be done today for the children of tomorrow.
!...)
. J
Eugene Code
Chapter 6
ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH
Nuisances
6.005
Definitions. For purposes of sections 6.005 to 6.845, the following words
and phrases mean:
Developed property. A tract of land occupied preponderantly by a structure
used or designed for use as a residence or a place of economic enterprise,
by landscaping, by other improvement accessory to the structure, or by a
combination of such land development.
Enforcing officer. Any city employee authorized by the city manager to
enforce the nuisance abatement provisions of this chapter.
Graffiti. Any inscriptions, words, figures or designs, other than handbills,
that are marked, etched, scratched, drawn, painted, pasted, or otherwise
affixed to the exterior surface of public or private property, without the
knowledge and prior consent of the owner or person in charge of the
property.
~
---,
Person in charge of property. An agent, occupant, lessee, tenant, contract
purchaser, or other person having possession or control of property or the
supervision of a construction project on the property.
Person responsible. Any or all of the following:
(a) The owner of the property on which the nuisance exists or the owner of
property which abuts a public way where a nuisance exists.
(b) The person in charge of the property or of property which abuts a public
way where a nuisance exists.
(c) The person who causes the nuisance to come into or continue in
existence.
Public way. Any street, road, alley, right-of-way, pedestrian or bicycle
easement for public use.
Rodent-proof. Any building, structure or part thereof is "rodent-proof' when
it is constructed of concrete, metal or some equally impermeable material
and in a manner that excludes rats and mice therefrom.
Vegetation. Plant life, including but not limited to, trees, shrubs, flowers,
weeds and grass.
(Section 6.005 amended by Ordinance No. 18199, enacted May 31, 1978; Ordinance No.
19393, enacted July 28, 1986, effective January 28, 1987; administratively amended by
6-1
01/01/2006
(i)
Eugene Code
Ordinance No. 19939, enacted November 17, 1993, effective December 17, 1993; and
amended by Ordinance No. 20165, enacted August 11, 1999, effective September 10, 1999.)
6.007 Nuisances - Prohibition and Responsibility to Abate.
(1) No person responsible shall cause or permit a nuisance on public or
private property.
(2) The person responsible shall be liable for injury, damage or loss to
person or property caused by the negligent failure to abate any
nuisance described in this code.
(3) The city shall not be liable for injury, damage or loss to any person or
property caused in whole or in part by the failure of the person
responsible to comply with subsection (1) of this section, or by the
failure of the city as a person responsible to abate a nuisance.
(4) Neither the duty of the person responsible to keep property free of
nuisances nor his/her failure to do so is dependent upon notice from the
city to abate the nuisance.
(5) The person responsible shall defend and hold harmless the city from all
claims for loss or damage arising from the failure to comply with
subsection (1) of this section.
(Section 6.007 added by Ordinance No. 19393, enacted July 28, 1986, effective January 28,
1987.)
.010 Nuisances Affectina the Public. The following are nuisances which may
be abated as provided in this code:
(a) Animal carcasses. etc. The deposition of an animal carcass or part
thereof, or any excrement or sewage, or industrial waste, or any putrid,
nauseous, decaying, deleterious, offensive, or dangerous substance in
I a stream, well, spring, brook, ditch, pond, river, or other inland waters
\
i. within the city, or the placing of such substances in such position that
\ high water or natural seepage will carry the same into such waters.
\ (b) Attractive nuisances. No owner or person in charge of property shall
permit thereon:
1. Unguarded machinery, equipment, or other devices which are
attractive, dangerous, and accessible to children.
~ 2. Lumber, logs, or pilings placed or stored in a manner so as to be
attractive, dangerous, and accessible to children.
~ 3. An open pit, quarry, cistern, or other excavation without
/ safeguards or barriers to prevent such places from being used by
children.
4. An open, vacant structure which is attractive, dangerous and
accessible to children or which is used for habitation by
trespassers.
This section shall not apply to authorized construction projects with
reasonable safeguards to prevent injury or death to playing children.
(c) Debris. An accumulation of decomposed animal or vegetable matter,
garbage, rubbish, manure, offal, ashes, discarded containers, waste,
6-2 01/01/2006
C~)
--
(f)
(9)
,
~ (h)
(i)
Eugene Code
paper, debris, trash, hay, grass, straw, weeds,litter, rags, or other
refuse matter or substance which by itself in conjunction with other
substances is deleterious to public health or comfort, or is unsightly, or
creates an offensive odor.
(d) Fences.
1. A fence, barrier, partition or obstruction electrically charged or
connected with any electric source in such a manner as to
transmit an electrical shock or charge to any person, animal or
thing which might come in contact therewith.
2. A barbed-wire fence along a sidewalk or public way except
barbed-wire placed on top of fences to prevent access 0 enclosed
hazardous areas or facilities, or barbed-wire on fences in an AG
Agricultural District.
(e) Iceboxes and other containers. An abandoned, unattended or
discarded icebox, refrigerator or other container accessible to children
which has an airtight door, or lock which may not be released for
opening from the inside. This definition does not inClude iceboxes,
refrigerators, or other containers offered for sale by commercial
establishments provided that the same are kept within enclosures from
which children are excluded at all times except business hours.
Odors. Premises which are in such a state or condition as to cause an
offensive odor or which are in an unsanitary condition.
Privies. etc. A privy, vault, cesspool, septic tank or drain which emits a
noisome and offensive smell, or which is prejudicial to public health.
Staanant water. An accumulation of stagnant or impure water which
affords or might afford a breeding place for mosquitoes or other insects.
Veaetation. Any vegetation on public or private property that:
1. Is a hazard to pedestrian or vehicular use of a sidewalk or street
by obstructing passage or vision. The hazards include but are not
limited to:
(a) Vegetation that encroaches upon or overhangs a pedestrian
way or adjacent curb strip lower than nine feet or
encroaches upon or overhangs a street lower than 15 feet.
(b) Vegetation which obstructs motorist or pedestrian view of
traffic, traffic signs and signals, street lights and name signs,
or other safety fixtures or markings placed in the public way.
2. Is a hazard to the public or to persons or property on or near the
property where the vegetation is located.
3. Is obnoxious as defined'in section 6.815(1).
4. Is an obstruction of access to and use of any public facilities
placed within the public way.
5. Is an obstruction of drainage facilities in the public way, including
but not limited to roadside ditches, street curbs and gutters,
catchbasins and culverts.
6-3
01/01/2006
G)
Eugene Code
6. The roots of which have entered a sewer, lateral sewer or house
connection and are stopping, restricting or retarding the flow of
sewage therein.
(j) Vision obstructions. Any veget~tion, structure, mounding of earth or
other physical obstruction:
1. Which encroaches upon the vision clearance area defined in
subsection 9.0500 of this code; or
2. Which is higher than 18 inches above the crown of the adjacent
roadway in that portion of the right of way between the property
line and the curb line within 35 feet from the intersection of curb
lines, if extended, at any street intersection or within 15 feet from
the intersection of the curb line with an alley. If no curb exists, no
such use of the right of way shall be made within 25 feet of the
corner of the private property closest to the street intersection.
(k) Sidewalk accumulations. An accumulation of leaves, snow, ice, rubbish
and other litter or any obstruction upon a sidewalk.
(I) Unused drivewavs. Driveway approaches as defined in section 7.400
which are no longer in use.
(m) Graffiti. Notwithstanding the definition of "graffiti" in section 6.005 of
this code, neither the city nor a property owner shall be required to
abate graffiti that consists of inscriptions, words, figures or designs that
are etched or scratched into window or other'Qlass of a public or private
building.
(n) Unlawful erosion. A violation of sections 6.625 to 6.645 of this code,
the rules adopted thereunder, the erosion prevention permit or a
condition thereon. Unlawful erosion includes the impacts of such
erosion, on-site or off-site.
(0) Others. Any other thing, substance, condition, or activity prohibited by
state law, common law, this code, other ordinances, or which is
determined by the council to be injurious or detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare of the city.
(Section 6.010 amended by Ordinance No. 19146, enacted May 25, 1983; and Ordinance No.
19393, enacted July 28, 1986, effective January 28, 1987; administratively amended by
Ordinance No. 19939, enacted November 17, 1993, effective December 17, 1993; and
amended by Ordinance No. 19969, enacted July 21, 1994; Ordinance No. 20165, enacted
August 11, 1999, effective September 10, 1999; and Ordinance No. 20169, enacted September
27, 1999, effective October 27, 1999.)
6.015 Rodent Control- Conditions Attractina Rats Prohibited.
(1) No owner or person in charge of property shall allow conditions to exist
thereon or thereinl.which attract or are likely to attract, feed or harbor
rats or mice. The conditions prohibited by this section are nuisances
subject to abatement as provided in this code.
(2) All portions of every building or other structure, other than residences,
in which handling, storing or keeping any substance on which rats and
mice can feed shall be rodent-proof.
I
-
6-4
(5)
01/01/2006
April 10, 2006
City of Eugene
Board of Councilors
My name is Carrol Dower and I live at 1000 Welcome Way. I am an active Bethel
citizen and Friend of Golden Garden Ponds, a city park more commonly called
"The Pits".
We have lost a total of five teen age boys to drowning at Golden Garden Park. Two of
which died last June. These were responsible adolescent boys, who knew how to
swim. All the drowning has occurred in the same pond. This undeveloped park is
frequented almost exclusively by teens, for fishing, swimming and riding dirt bikes.
It has little appeal to adults, and families. We will present many ideas on how this
park can be safe and appeal to everyone.
Golden Garden Park is not scheduled for development for 20 years out. The Citizens
of Bethel want the development of the park to be moved into a more current plan,
beginning with this fiscal year. We have a rapidly growing community, and a large
portion of that populous is adolescent and children. In fact, we have 6,000 children
enrolled in eleven Bethel schools. We cannot express deeply enough how
important the development of this park means to us.
The rescue effort last June was greatly hampered by not having a bridge to access
the ponds. EMS had to abandon their vehicles and run on foot with heavy gear a
good distance to reach the boys in trouble. We acknowledge a special thank you to
Johnny Medlin, the city park's director, for moving the construction of the access
bridge to completion as soon as possible.
We understand the initial development of the park requires a feasibility study for an
appropriate design. We ask the council here tonight to appropriate this funding in
the amount of $30,000. In addition to this expenditure, we also request purchasing
of a 100 foot strip on the west side for grading as part of the November Bond
Measure. Currently, the city does have a schedule for acquiring more land here.
We have been given tremendous support and technical expertise by our City of
Eugene Parks & Recreation, the Fire dept and Ems personnel, as well as our ward
representative. They have all contributed and helped us shape the five page outline
of our development ideas submitted before you.
We need: signs, noting the danger, signs noting the geography, signs appropriate to
each of the four ponds: NO Swimming, Fishing here.
We need: Names for the ponds.
We need an open road, so families can look after one another.
We need an access bridge over the slue to the ponds, which is forthcoming.
We need a key for the gate, for EMS or a key held at one of the many houses facing the
park.
We need life jackets or floatation devices. Fire and EMS have a whole program for
obtaining floatation devices.
But mostlv we need this Dark to hitch a ride on the fast track and Qet it
aDDroved for develoDment now.
And finally, where there is a body of water, there is danger. I ask the council to
consider the request to develop Golden Garden Park, urgent as well as opportunistic.
Message
Page 1 of 1
WEISS Carolyn J
From: MEDLIN Johnny R
Sent: Monday, April 1 0, 2006 8:45 AM
To: WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: monday -April 10- city forum
FYI... Johnny
-----Original Message-----
From: ruth anne paul [mailto:ra1uha@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2006 1:16 PM
To: MEDLIN Johnny R
Subject: Re: monday -April 10- city forum
Golden Garden Parks needs to be developed now. The money needs to be
appropriated for the feasibility study as well as for a 100 foot strip on the west side for
grading. We would like more land to be purchased to expand the park. An issue not
related to the park but makes Golden Gardens Park having been ignored all these
years even more of a travesty is pushing up the agenda for removing the trees along
Oakway Road after someone got run over because of the damage to sidewalks and
road from the trees' root system. The trees were removed and sidewalks repaired in a
short time but Golden Gardens Park has been ignored for many years and four boys
have drowned there. How many lives does it take??? Also, The intersection at Barger
and the Beltline was improved after 'only' two children died as a result of insufficient
crossings...... Thank you for your attention to this problem and solutions to
it.....Sincerely, Ruth Anne Paul
Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone calls to 30+ countries for just 2~/min with Yahoo! Messenger
with Voice.
4/14/2006
Message
Page 1 of2
WEISS Carolyn J
From: COREY Kurt A
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 1:10PM
To: MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: Golden Gardens park
-----Original Message-----
From: TAYLOR Dennis M
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 8:56 AM
To: COREY Kurt A; JONES Angel L; CARLSON Jim R
Cc: MILLER Dawna A
Subject: FW: Golden Gardens park
FYI--DMT
-----Original Message---n
From: Deborah Craig [mailto:dcraig1280@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 20067:56 PM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Subject: Golden Gardens park
Attn City Council & Parks Planning:
I'm glad 1 attended a Bethel Neighborhd Association mtg 3/16 where I was prepared to argue
about "nanny society" mentality, but apparently 5 children have drowned in the past dozen years or
so in (one particular, NE) Golden Garden pond. So something needs to be done, immediately,
especially as the neighborhood there has grown so. More children will surely drown if nothing is done.
But the reason I came to the mtg was to request some garbage containers be placed in the park, and
request that a bridge be built across the Beltline drainage ditch so the entire 46 acres can be accessed
without having to wade across a 15 ft ditch. 1 am grateful to hear a bridge will be built this summer
(altho the Parks Planning & Develpmt web site sure doesn't mention it).
But about the NE pond where all the kids have drowned. Better signage would help tremendously. The
current" 16 ft depth" sign doesn't begin to tell how difficult it would be to escape a vertically sided pit
filled with entangling water weeds. That apparently is the essence of the problem.
Two crosses have been erected by the parents of the most recent victims. If five crosses were visible I
should think that would give anyone pause from jumping in. Also a sign with a swimmer circled with a
diagonal line thru the figure, right near the crosses. A few exclamation points on no-swimming sign. I'm
glad 1 never threw sticks in there for my dog to fetch.
The neighborhood mtg emphasized how schools should alert their students regarding how dangerous the
ponds are, but unless the info is repeated every single year indefinitely this education would be short-
lived. Better signage would better educate more people. Perhaps a solar-powered phone connected to
911, like on 1-5 freeway.
I go to Golden Gardens park because it's a great dog park as well as nature walk. 1 would like to pick up
garbage while I'm there. But there's nowhere to put it. And it's a long walk back to any carpark area if I
were to fill a bag or two & drag it back. My most recent trip there I did see a lined garbage can
(someone is paying attention?) but it was at the extreme north end of park, far from a public street (and
(0
4/14/2006
Message
Page 2 of2
garbage pickup) as could be.
Thnx for any attention.
Deborah Craig
1280 Taft St
Eugene 94702
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
(2)
4/1412006
J
\ 'C
j'\i. \'C0SJ ~
\\J\
Hello Mayor Piercy and Members of City Council.
My name is Antho_ny Johnson and I am an 8th grade student at Prairie
Mountain School located in the Bethel School District. I am writing to you to
inform you about my thoughts and feelings regarding Golden Garden
Ponds located in West Eugene. If you don't already know, I lost one of my
best friends to those ponds and want something or anything done to make
them safe. It was also brought to my attention that he and his cousin were
not the only kids to lose their lives in the ponds. Four boys, in the last 8
years, have been taken by the ponds, also known as, THE PITS. I plan to
do whatever it takes to make those ponds safe for everyone.
They are extremely dangerous and it's supposed to be a place people call
a park. It is filled with trash, high vegetation, and nasty, disgusting water. It
is important to make this area safe because we are letting days, months,
and years go by where more lives can and probably will be taken day by
day. A life is priceless and it should not be taken away by some trashy
pond that we, as members of the city of Eugene, can do something about.
~f~'--_.Io.\\iRl\l,._~,,,,,.4i\ij;_1li!S;i""'.Aiii;KifiI~,il!i!i:~lK~:1i;jo\j~.~_~Q+-.e"and"c.wb., .Q ".f. ,\LOU ,Ql:!Qn, Q th
""'~~4,'t""'S~t?~lIl"fV;I;"lie~'~V~\""'IVQili''WI.\lJ.t,t'~\e!lI\~~,~'filI1.i~~W~~,jlI'~~~;1l.)i!!i;*~:~4li\lM~~W:.}"<'"
".'''..'_..... .i'~*~;;~~jiH'
'~, ,!. '. "-...,, ;. ..~Uv.
If'
(.J)
\
I want to thank you for your time and the opportunity to get across to you
and share with you my thoughts about Golden Garden Ponds. I hope you
re~lize as of right NOW that these ponds are a threat to our community and
that we ask you, please, to help us fix them.
0-)
"-!:._/
Some things 8th ~ade students would like to see done
. Build a memorial
· Plant gardens and trees
· Build a distraction like a playground
. Clean up trash
· Make it more appealing to the public
· Fundraiser for memorial and plants
.
(iJ
Mayor Kitty Piercy and City Council
My name is Amanda Cantwell. I am an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain
School. I would like to bring to your attention the Golden Garden Ponds, or as a lot
of people know it as "the pits".
I know just from living here in this community that these ponds are NOT a
priority 1, but let me tell you, my best friend drowned there, and to me there's no
other priority more important. Not only did Nick drown there, but 3 other boys
have lost there lives in the exact same place.
It's sad that people know about what happened, and they don't do anything
about it. Four kids have already died; how many more is it going to take for people
to realize that those ponds are dangerous?
I don't expect you to do everything; that's why my classmates and I are
starting to clean up around the banks of the pond and were even planning to put in
a memorial to show that people have died there. Maybe that will distract people
from the ponds.
You are the person that can make the difference, the difference to save many
lives! ... Please don't be selfish and just put this problem and this park on the
backburner. If we would have made it a priority years ago after the 3rd death, my
best friend would still be here. I will never be the same. Do the right thing and do
something with that place that has become a burial ground!
Sincerely,
Amanda Cantwell
Mayor Piercy and Members of City Council
I am writing this letter to you, Mayor and the City Council, about how dangerous
the Golden Garden ponds are. I am an 8th grade student who goes to Prairie Mountain
School. My name is Justin Huelsman. I have lost a friend and so has everyone else in 8th
grade. Our 8th grade class has brainstormed ideas that we could do as a community and
you could do as a city.
A few suggestions on how you could make the ponds safer is by planting an
actual garden there so people have something more to look at than ponds. That way they
will look at all the flowers and plants and not think about the ponds. Another thing you
could do is put up bright, eye catcher signs that say, " DANGER NO SWIMMING."
Some more suggestions would be to put up barbeque pits and some grass so
people can have barbeques and play around in the grass. You also could spray
barkamolche to make actual trails through the ponds. The banks could be sloped so if
anyone does fall in they have a way of getting out; and you could use a playground for
the little kids.
Other ways to make the Golden Garden ponds safe would be to clean up the water
and cut all the weeds in the water. All of these suggestions that I am saying to you should
be ways to make the ponds safe. Even if you put up memorials to show everyone who
comes to these ponds how many people have died there and why it should be safe.
Thank you so much for taking your time to listen to all of my suggestions. I hope
that you make this a priority 1 in the city of Eugene. I thank you for listening to what I
have had to say.
Sincerely,
Justin Huelsman
Mayor Kitty Piercy and Members of the City Council:
My name is Gabrielle Williams and I am an eighth grade student at
Prairie Mountain. As you all know there have been a couple of tragedies
over the years at Golden Garden Ponds. One of them would be my friend
of seven years, Nick Davis. This death has affected a numerous amount of
students at our school and definitely his family.
These ponds are not safe for anyone. They have all kinds of trash,
vegetation and water currents that most of the time aren't visible to the
visitor's eye. It is very important that something changes so that no one
has to go through loosing a friend or family member to the ponds again.
My class members and I plan to go to the ponds to plant trees and
flowers to draw the attention away from the thought of swimming. I would
also like to put signs around the ponds to let visitors know how deceiving
and dangerous they are. Many other students including myself hope to
see a memorial area to let people know that the Golden Garden Ponds
have taken lives. I would like to see a sandbox or a playground area so
that younger children aren't attracted to the water. I also hope to see a
barbecue pit so that parents would be more likely to spend time with their
kids there and make sure that they don't go near the water.
(j)
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter regarding the Golden
Garden Ponds. I hope to see some improvements around this area.
Sincerely,
Gabrielle Williams
(~)
"
Mayor Piercy & Members of the City Council,
My name is Liz Hayes and I am an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain School.
This summer, our school lost a close friend, Nick Davis, to Golden Garden Ponds.
We also lost Brittan Shepard Davis, a student at Shasta middle, who was one of our
student's brothers. Three other children have also lost their lives to these ponds just
in the last twelve years. This needs to be stopped.
This park needs to be cleaned and the ponds need to be made safe. Right now the
parks clean up is not planned to happen for twenty years. By then, I will be 34 and
could already have lost a loved one to these ponds. We, as an eighth grade, are
trying to plant trees and put down bark dust to do our part in making the park
cleaner.
We need you to make the park safe by killing the weeds and garbage at the bottom
of the ponds that entangle children. Also we need you to make a bank so that if some
one falls in they can get out.
Please, we need your help. This is not a small issue! No one wants to lose another
loved one.
Sincerely,
Liz Hayes
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of City Council,
Hi my name is Britnee Klopp. I am an eighth grader at Prairie Mountain
Middle School. Last summer on father's day I lost two of my very good friends,
Nick Davis and his cousin Britton Shephard Davis in a swimming accident at
Golden Garden ponds. My purpose now is to inform you of how much suffering us
kids have endured in losing our friends. I think that something should be done
about the safety of the ponds soon so that no other friends and family's have to go
through the pain that all of us have already went through and continue to deal with
today.
I think that it is very important to make the ponds safe so that the people
that do enjoy going and hanging out at the ponds can do so without worrying about
their safety. I do know that even through people know about the deaths, they still
think it is a "cool" place to hang out and swim in.
I really do not have a plan but my idea is to make Golden Garden ponds a
safer more fun place to hang out we don't want people to swim there. It would be
nice if maybe we could plant some trees and flowers to make it more a "Golden
Garden", add picnic tables and garbage cans. One idea that we eighth graders came
up with is to make a memorial at the ponds for all the kids that have died there; to
remind people why it is unsafe.
(D
Again I do not really have an idea for the City Council on what they should
do. The only thing that they really need to do is make it safe and make people aware
of how unsafe it is right now.
In conclusion I just want to remind you again of how hurt we all were when
we lost Nick and Britton and I don't think that anybody else should have to go
through that. I think that now this should be our #1 priority so no one else drowns
or dies there.
Sincerely Britnee Klopp
(7~
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of the City Council;
My name is Brandee Rhodes and I am an eighth grade student attending Prairie
Mountain Middle School. I am writing this letter to bring to your attention to the tragic
losses that many have faced because of the Golden Garden Ponds. These ponds have done
nothing but bring pain and suffering to our community.
Over the last twelve years, four teenage boys have drowned in them and a few years
prior to these accidents, another teen had drowned. To me that is saying something along
the lines of danger. It is important to make this place safe because of the fact that it is a
public place and parents allow their children to go play in that area. Kids are going to be
kids and explore their surroundings. If these ponds are not safe, than we are risking
another death. Being a friend to a few of these boys, I know how it feels to lose someone
close and I don't think that anybody else should have to be put through it.
The eighth grade class at Prairie Mountain have come up with several ideas on how
we can make it a better place for us and for our future generations. To go for an easy start
we could begin with planting trees and plants. After that, I believe that putting up sings
could help show parents what their kids will be messing around with. It could help prevent
many unexpected goodbyes for all.
Thank you for reading this letter and I ask that you take into serious consideration
all of the things that I have brought to your attention. These things are very important to, not
only me, but the entire community. We have all been affected in one way or another. I hope
to see a change in the situation involving the ponds.
Sincerely,
Brandee Rhodes
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of city council:
I am an eighth grade student at Prairie Mountain School. My purpose in writing
this letter is to inform you about the serious problem that students in the Bethel area face
on a daily basis. This serious problem would be the Golden Garden Ponds.
The Golden Garden Ponds are unsafe for children and adults. If it is called a park
it should be safe. If you seriously expect people to enjoy a day at the park it definitely
won't be there. Many people have drowned and many more will drown if the problem
doesn't get solved.
Prairie mountain students have lost one of their closest friends. So naturally they
have many idea's to make a resolution to the problem. Many unfortunately cost a lot of
money. A simple yet complex solution is to have many fundraisers to get money to help
make money. Some of the things we came up with are to put memorials up for all the
people who have drown and to plant flowers.
City council could do many things to help us do the many things. They could
give us money to do some of the things we have ideas for. They could put playgrounds
and walkways for the people to walk on.
My final thoughts are that both students and the city can help solve the problem.
Sincerely,
Troy Richey
Mayor Kitty Piercy and Members of City Council:
My name is Brittany Noelle Burian and I am an eighth grade student at Prairie
Mountain SchooL-I, as well as other families and students here at PMS, would like to
bring to your attention the Golden Garden Ponds and the horrific event that has taken
place there.
This last summer, two young boys drown. Though I did not know either one of
them, it hurt me too. Those were two people that I could be great friends with right
now. Feeling this pain makes me think about how much it must hurt the people who
already were their friends and close to them. What about their family? Those boys,
Nick and Britton, were related. Someone else related to them stood there from the side
lines just watching them drown because there was nothing they could do.
Four kids have drown there in the last twenty years and I am one of the many
people who feels strongly about making the GG Ponds safer and put a stop to the
drownings. I know that we don't have complete control over what people choose to do
but we can help prevent them from making the wrong choices. The eighth grade and I
have been talking and we think that we can do something about it ourselves. Taking a
field trip to go and clean up the Golden Garden Ponds area and planting some trees
around the ponds are just a couple of the actions we could take. We figure that by
making the Golden Garden Ponds more of an actual garden that people will be less
focused on the water and more focused on the beautiful scenery and the flowers. We
also wanted to put up a couple signs. The one we have been pondering over the most is
a memorial sign with a list of names of the people who have drown there. I think thats
CD
will get others thinking about the dangers that those ponds consist of; mostly
drowning.
Of course we are not capable of doing this ourselves. We would need help from
you and other citizens to come up with money for plants and signs. When
brainstorming, my class thought that we could do some fundraisers or a carwash in
order to raise money for trees and flowers. We would also accept donations. If we don't
do something about this now then more lives could be taken. Just making the edges of
the ponds at a slant instead of a steep drop would help!
I thank you for taking your time to read my letter and I hope you will take into
consideration what we plan to do and help us.
Sincerely,
Brittany N. Burian
Ci-)
To Members of City Council and Mayor Kitty
Piercy
Hi my name is Travis Jones. I am a soon to be 8th grade graduate from Prairie
Mountain School, and I am writing to bring to your attention the dangers of Golden
Garden Ponds. As you know 4 people have drown at the Ponds or "The Pitts". The City
should strive to make the Ponds a real park.
To make the ponds safe we should build trails so we can travel on. Trails would
make the ponds more appealing to others. We should also build a path for rescue vehicles
in case somebody were to fall in to the ponds. Also a park for kids to play on and a
swimming pool that would seem safer and better to swim in. Some things that we can do
is to spread the bark, make signs, and to plant trees and plants to make a eye caching
scenery for those visiting the ponds.
You should add signs about the weeds, the depth, and the under toe it has. Signs
explaining the deaths would scare people to stay out of the ponds. Add pictures names
and crosses. Ifit wasn't for Shauna Davis (mother of Nick Davis who drown because of
the ponds) nobody might have came forward and the ponds would stay deadly for the rest
of our lives.
Put trails to slope the edges so that way if somebody falls in they would be able to
get out. There is no slope just a drop off. Thank you for listening and try to make the
ponds safe.
Sincerely,
Travis Jones
Mayor Piercy and Members of City Council:
My name is Alec Meadows and I am an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain School. I didn't know Nick
or any of the other boys that have drowned in the Golden Garden Ponds. A lot of people, like me, think
that if a park is made or an area is considered to be a park, than it should be a clean and safe environment.
I have never been to the ponds, but most people who have, say they are filthy, with garbage and masses of
vegetation below the waters. Does that sound like a clean, safe environment to you? I wouldn't think so.
Our 8th grade class has decided to do our part to help. Weare planning a field trip to the ponds so that we
can clean it up a little and add plants and trees to make it more of an enjoyable place to be. We don't want
to have dirty, unsafe, and smelly area that people consider to be a park.
Some ways we think you can help would be to make a shore line that allows someone who chooses to go
into the water, a way to get out quickly and safely. We don't expect you to do all of the work because we
are also willing to help clean up. We also want to have a fundraiser so we can raise enough money to put
a memorial in the park to honor the boys that have lost their lives and also raise awareness that several
kids have died in these deadly waters.
I would like you to picture yourself in someone else's shoes. You are walking next to the ponds and a
friend decides to jokingly push you into the water just to be funny. You try to get out but you can't find a
good grip and even though you are close to the water's edge, the water is so deep you can't touch. Soon
you start to panic and the weeds get a hold of you. Someone sees what is happening; sees you struggling
in the water and luckily he has a cell phone. You see help is on the way but they can't get to you because
there is no access to the pond you are taking every last breath in. You're last thought is why me? Why
now? This has to be a dream. The thoughts end and you're life has come to a sudden and unexpected end.
Please help us make the Golden Garden Ponds a safe place for everyone who chooses to visit this area we
call, a park.
Sincerely,
Alec Meadows
Mayor Kitty Piercy and Members of City Council:
Hello, my name is McKenzie Davis. I am the sister of Britton Davis and the cousin Nick
Davis, the boys who drown in Golden Garden Ponds. I am writing to tell you that we need to do
something with the Golden Garden Ponds.
It has taken lives every 4 to 5 years and something needs to be done about it. Why not try to save
lives if it is in our control. I don't want someone else's family to go through the pain and suffering
that my family is going through right now if they don't need to and it can be prevented.
It's considered a park. Kids should be able to play on a playground, fish, go on walks, walk
their pets, and enjoy themselves. However, Golden Garden Ponds are too nasty to do anything down
there. I know you are thinking, "if it is so nasty, why was your brother and cousin there?" The
answer is simple, they are teenage boys. I ask you if any of you have teenage sons? I think you'd
agree, that's what teenage boys do and that's what teenage boys are attracted to. If it' s a 'public
park', what would make them think anything is unsafe? I know them well enough to know that if
they had any clue how deep the pond was or what dangers lie beneath, they would have made a
different choice.
All I know is I want something done to make it a nice park. I will volunteer my time to make
it that way if that is what it is going to take and that is what you need. I think lots of people would
be more than willing to lend a hand and volunteer.
I think it is important to make the area safe because it is killing people. I plan to give my
time to make the Golden Garden Ponds safe. I hope you, our City Council and City Representatives,
hear our voices and do your part to make the park a nice park; a 'real' park; not just dangerous
waters. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
McKenzie Shepherd-Davis
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of City Council:
My name is Taylor Hawke. I go to Prairie Mountain School. We as a school want to
change Golden Garden ponds because many of us have lost something important to us
there. Just this past summer, Nick Davis drowned there. The Davis family lost there
oldest son and now they are missing 1 child that will forever haunt and sadden their
family. Many people have lost a child, a family member, and even a friend. We as the
City of Eugene have got to make the ponds a safer environment.
It is very important that we make the ponds as spic and span as we can because if we
don't, many people can lose another kid, friend, or family member. I'm sure that if one of
you lost someone important to you, you would try to make this a better place. Think of
how the Davis family feels about losing a piece from the family. That is why they want to
make this a better place, so other people don't lose someone important to them. It is very
hard to lose a family member at the age of 12. It is extremely hard. I will do any thing it
takes to not let other people drown here.
Our class plans on putting in plants to make a better environment for the ponds. We need
your help to make this park a lot nicer and safer. There are a whole bunch of ideas to
make the ponds awesome. We need to cut down the weeds in them so they don't tangle
up with people if they do choose to swim. Will you please, take a few minutes to hear
what we and other family's have to say? Please listen.
Sincerely,
Taylor Hawke
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of City Council:
My name is Jessica Lovell. I am an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain School.
My purpose in writing this letter is to make Golden Gardens Park more like a park and to
do my best to make people stop and think twice before swimming in these nasty ponds.
To make the ponds safe is really important so we hopefully prevent future deaths
due to the ponds. I know about 60 kids who feel the same way. 60 kids at my school went
in to 8th grade with one less person; I don't think that is fair.
Below are some ideas that my class came up with to make the ponds a safer place:
. Plant trees
. Create a memorial for the kids that past away
. Create a garden
. Make trails
Here are some ideas we had that maybe you could help us with:
. Put in a playground
. Put in bark
. Put up more convincing signs
Maybe if we all work together, we can make Golden Gardens a more fun; more
safe, and an all around better place to be.
Sincerely,
Jessica Lovell
Mayor Kitty Piery and members ofthe City Council:
Hi my name is Kali Rescigno. I am an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain School. I live in Eugene
Or. I am writing this letter to try to make the Golden Garden Ponds a safer place. In the past year there
have been several lives lost due to the nature of the ponds.
The point I want to make to you is that if the ponds are called a park then why don't we want to try and
make them look like a park.
In this last summer I lost 2 of my really good friends due to those ponds. Those aren't the only
people that have drowned there. All together there have been 4 boys that have drowned since 1998 and
even before that. So, why don't we try to make this place safer? There are kids that go there to ride
their bikes and we don't want anything to happen to them. We don't like to have people pass away. It's
never a good feeling. Let's put some effort into it and make this place as safe as we can!
The Golden Garden Ponds is called a park, so let's make it that way. We need to get easier access to
the ponds. By adding things to it like a playground, benches, sand, basketball courts, people would
have other things to do rather than be enticed by nasty water! You know, maybe if we were to clean it
up, they would look a lot nicer. Cleaning the inside of the ponds is most important because I know for
a fact there are at least cars, bowling balls, weeds, trash, tires and god knows what else. Let's clean all
that up! It may take time, but it will not be wasted; it will save a lot oflives, not only lives, but also
broken hearts.
I really hope you can help us out. It would make a really big impact on us to know we've been heard.
It will also make it a place where we can go and actually not have to look at the nasty water and trash
all over, and see what our loved ones passed away in. We can feel better knowing that we tried so hard
to make it so no one else will have an accident there again. Thank you for listening to what I have to
say I appreciate it.
Sincerely,
Kali Rescigno
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of City Council,
My name is Breauna Germyn and I'm an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain middle
school. This summer I lost one of my best friends Nick Davis at Golden Garden Ponds. It
has affected me, my friends, and my community. Not only has my friend died there but
many others, and somebody needs to stop it. Too many deaths have occurred there.
You call it a park but too many teens here in Eugene call it the Pitts. To me, that doesn't
sound like a safe park that I would like to visit. Not only does it sound bad but it sounds
dangerous and it is dangerous. I think that in order to make a change you need to do your
part to clean them up, and maybe add some play structures for children. You could also
make notice that those ponds are dangerous and many deaths have occurred there. We
need roads in order to get there in case there ever is another accident. Hopefully, there
will be a chance somebody might live because it took too long for the fire department to
get there.
This really has affected many, many people, especially family and friends. If that were
your son, daughter, or relative, I know you would understand Just please make notice
that peoples lives are gone because of those ponds, and I know that many others feel the
same way I do. All I ask is for you to help out in our community, and if no changes are
made there will probably be more deaths occurring in the future.
Sincerely,
Breauna Germyn
Mayor Piercy and members of the Eugene City Council:
My name is Bryce Englehardt and I go to Prairie Mountain School. I
. would like to talk about the Golden Garden Ponds, or The Pits as referred to.
I knew one of the four people who have drowned in these ponds in the past
12 years. The ponds are unsafe and I want to make cleaning them up a
number one priority.
The ponds have swallowed many lives in their depths. Not just the
people who have died, or even their families. Everybody around them was
affected. We need to make the ponds safer before any more lives can be
taken.
I will do as much as I can to make the ponds safer. My 8th grade class
has plans to set up memorial, put sawdust on the trails, and plant trees. We
plan to fund these projects by various fund raisers.
There are things that we can't do though. Things like building a road
to the ponds, lowering the bank, or by planting fish in them. I want to
basically turn them into Junction City Pond.
Please help us make a better, safer, community. This should be our
number one priority. I leave you with these things to consider. Sincerely,
Bryce Englehardt
Mayor Piercy and Members of City Council:
My name is Alyssa Lujan. I'm a 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain school. I
would like to bring to your attention our city park Golden Garden Ponds.
I believe along with my 8th grade classmates, that the Golden Garden Ponds
should be a high priority in our community. Four boys in the last12 years and another
prior to that, have died in those ponds. If we do not make the park a priority then more
people will die before we fix up the park.
Our Prairie Mountain 8th grade is committed to helping make Golden Garden
Ponds safe and fun place to be. We would like to help by planting flowers and making
Golden Garden Ponds more like garden. We would like to make a memorial for the boys
who have died there. We are so committed that we are planning on fundraising to come
up with money. To do some of the thing we are planning on doing for the park.
We would like your help to make Golden Garden Ponds that safe place. We were
thinking that you could cut the weeds that are growing at the bottom of the ponds every
few months . We also thought that you could add a railing around the ponds. You could
build a playground for children. In doing these things we can make Golden Garden Ponds
a safe place.
Thank You for considering what I have said about Golden Garden Ponds and make it a
priority,
Alyssa Lujan
Mayor Piercy and The Eugene City Council:
I am Keir Tasa an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain School. I'd like to bring
to your attention that the Golden Garden Ponds aren't safe. You can't call it a city park if
it's not safe. Five boys have drowned there in the last 40 years. Even if one person had
died there it would still, be a big problem.
I have some solutions for the safety problems. You could rope off an area for
swimming and clean that place up. You could give the ponds banks so if someone
accidentally fell in they could get out. You could put a rail around the ponds so if
someone tripped they wouldn't fall in. there are so many things you could do but the
question is will you do them.
Imagine it was one of your kids who had drowned, then would you do something.
The parents of the kids are feeling the grief you would be feeling if it were your kid. Do
you want this to happen again this summer or do you want to stop it. It's your choice. Are
you going to make this your #1 priority instead of your number #5?
Sincerely,
Keir Tasa
Mayor Kitty Piercy and members of City Council:
My name is Brittany Blake and I'm an eighth grade student at Prairie
Mountain. I am writing this letter to inform you about the losses at Golden Garden
ponds. In the last twelve years we have had four males drown in those ponds and
one prior to those four most of which ofthem were in their teens. We need to
concentrate on how many people have nearly drowned there as well. Attention has
to be brought to the ponds and something must be done.
It's important to make the ponds safe because if you didn't fix the problem
it's like you just sitting there watching it happen. You can make a difference it you
just help us to help other people. You being Mayor and City Council you need to
realize what needs to be done to keep us safe.
We would like to fill up the ponds with cement or dirt so that way people
won't be able to swim or drown in it. If it's meant to be a garden then lets make it a
garden. Our eight grade class has come up with a solution that we can do a
fundraiser to put in a memorial for the five young boys that drowned. We would
also like to put in some flowers and plant some trees and maybe some trails. We
want this to be a place for family's to come and have fun with each other.
I hope you take into consideration of what we have asked. It's not only
important to us but also to the family's with loved ones gone and the ones who don't
feel safe about letting their children go to a near by garden/park. We need to make a
place where people can go with their family and feel safe and have a good time.
I want to close this letter with a thank you. Thank you for taking time out of
your day to read a letter. Please remember that this isn't just a letter it is an
G)
important situation that needs to be taken care of. Thank you again and I hope you
have a good day.
Sincerely
Brittany Blake
(;'\
\7-)
To, Mayor Piercy and members or city council:
My name is Brandon McGinnis; I am an 8th grader at Prairie Mountain School. I
am writing this to address the matter of the Golden Garden Ponds.
Over the last 12 years 4 boys have drown in the ponds and another previous to that. The
area is unsafe and shouldn't be called a "park". A park is a place for people to play, and
have fun. The ponds are not a park. To keep the Golden Garden Ponds the way they are
now is like asking for more people to die. The ponds must be made safer. I don't see how
you can put this matter on the back burner. Ever day you don't do something about the
ponds is a day someone could die.
There are so many ways we can make the ponds safer. Our 8th grade class got
together and made a list of over 30 things our school and the state could do to improve
the ponds; for example our class could do the fallowing
-start by putting up sings that tell people how dangerous the ponds are and put a
memorial around the ponds
-plant a large garden and put down saw dust for trails
-clean the area
The fallowing are things the state could do for the ponds.
-build a playground
-put up fencing
-inform the people how dangerous the ponds are
1.'\
\~j
-improve the water quality
I believe that if we do a few fund raisers and start up a donation program we can
do all the things we need to do and more. we must act soon or more people will die.
Thank you for your time.
-sincerely Brandon Mcginnis
/?:)
A Letter for the City and Mayor Piercy
Hello, my name is Blake Crawford and this letter is for Mayor Piercy and
members of City Council. I go to school at Prairie Mountain off of Royal Avenue. I
am in eighth grade. I would like to help make the Golden Garden ponds a safe
environment.
A lot of people, young and old, go to the Golden Garden ponds. Four people
have drown in the ponds, I knew three and was really good friends with one of them.
Only four people have drowned there but many have had near death experiences at
the ponds. Although it is very unsafe you can't close it off, people will still find a way
in. Everybody needs to pitch in and make the Golden Garden ponds a much safer
place.
I would be willing to give hours of my time to help make the Golden Garden
ponds a safer place. There are a lot of people in Bethel District area that mayor may
not be able to help financially but will help physically. My parents won't let me go to
the ponds because they are so dangerous. The city should make a memorial for each
person who has died at the ponds.
I hope the city council will here my voice and get to work on the ponds. They
could make a garden to fit the name Golden Garden. They could put up a playground
or a pool to distract people from the ponds. They need to put up signs letting people
know about the vegetation, underwater current, and the fact it is practically sewage.
r
I')
In my conclusion the ponds might not be a high priority for the city because
their family doesn't live near the ponds. For people in or around the Bethel District
the Golden Garden ponds are the highest priority. Anyone who gets in the water has
no easy way out and they could get caught on garbage or the vegetation. They could
even get sucked under the water by the under current. Many people would greatly
appreciate it if the city would make the ponds safer. Thank you for reading my letter.
Sincerely,
Blake Crawford
,~
! v/
MAYOR PIERCY AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL:
My name is Brittainy Wilson and I am an 8th grade student at Prairie Mountain
School. I would like to bring to your attention the Golden Garden Ponds. I have lost a
classmate to those ponds. I didn't know Nick Davis very well. All though we weren't
very close; he was still a classmate of mine. He always brought laughter and liveliness to
our class room. I was very sad when I found out that he and his cousin, Britton, had
drowned at Golden Garden Ponds. It brought our 8th grade class closer as friends. It
shouldn't be death that brings people together. If I was sad, you could only imagine what
his family must have felt. They must have been devastated. I just wanted to let you know
that to prevent more deaths, we need to make this major project the top priority on your
list.
In order to prevent more deaths, we need to make this area, where lots ofteens my
age like to hang out, safe. There are many ways to make the ponds safer. A few ways
could be to totally close them down. Since that is not a possibility, then we need to think
of something more realistic. Realistically thinking, we could make the ponds look nicer,
plant various flowers and trees, and we could also make it automobile accessible.
Our class is going to do our part by planting trees and shrubs. We want to make
this place safe now, instead of twenty years from now. I would like to be able to go there
and not worry about falling in the water or breaking my wrist walking on the un-safe
trails. I would like to go to those ponds and not worry about other people getting hurt or
myself. Nick Davis' death shouldn't be the reason of wanting to do something about this
(~
i )
_/
...
park; it should have been cleaned up years ago. I feel bad for his family having to grieve
over his death.
I would love to see changes done to that "city park". I have wanted to do that
forever. My classmates and I want to do something about it, you should too. It is a very
dangerous park, and five boys have lost their lives already to this pond. When is enough,
enough?
In conclusion, this very disastrous park needs to be cleaned up. It should not
consume and swallow any more of Eugene's kids. It needs to be taken care of and should
not be ignored. It is very important and necessary that it be done. Thank you for reading
this.
Sincerely,
Brittainy Wilson
is'J
:,v,
_ 05/Q.3/06 _~D Q.8: 01 FAX 541 6873691
4J SUPERINT.OFFI
~002
r
46
School District 4J
Eugeae Public Schools
200 North Monroe Street
Eugen6, OR 97402-4295
--
April! 0, 2006
Dennis Taylor, City Manager
City of Eugene
777 Pearl Street
Eugene, OR 97401
Dear Dennis:
The Eugene School District would like to enter this letter into public testimony for the hearing on
the proposed Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Comprehensive Plan, scheduled on April 10,
2006.
Weare excited that the City is considering additional parks, recreation and open space
acquisitions and improvements. AU of these proVide immense public benefit and are of
particular value for children.
'--
As you know, due to decreasing enrollment, the District has recently sold four elementary school
properties (Laurelhill, Whiteaker. Westmoreland. a.nd Willakenzie), and has identified two other
for potential sale (Santa Clara and Bailey Hill). With this reduction in schools comes a.
corresponding loss in outdoor recreational spaces for the community.
At the same time, there is an increasing demand by youth sports organizations for playing and
practice time. We are also experiencing increased interest in outdoor club activities (notably
lacrosse). Loss of fields coupled with this increased community need exacerbates an already
over-capacity load on the current fields.
To help address this need, the District is plannine. to install synthetic fields at two middle
schools--Madison and Cal Young.-where the old school buildings are being replaced by new
schools. Due to the need for sufficient and safe v.ehicle access. there is a smaller area now
available for playing fields. Installing syntheticmultipwpose fields within the new tracks at both
schools will allow for more hours of use and help offset the loss of field space.
City staff estimate that the current synthetic fields at the district's four high schools generate an
approximate 6 times greater usage than comparable turf fields. These fields are used almost all
day, every day, and all year long except in the most extreme rainy conditions. One hour after a
heavy rain, the fields are not only playable, but are nearly in the same condition as on dry days.
Although the District has funds to develop synthetic fields at Cal Young and Madison, we do not
have resources to install the amenities of lights and bleachers that would allow for greater
--...... '"
_~03/06 WED 08:01 FAX 541 6873691
4J SUPERINT OFFI
I4J 003
community use. lfthe City couId fund these amenities and assist with field maintenance and
operating costs, we could maximize commWlity use of these athletic fields.
'-...-/ As you know, since 2000, the District and the City have successfully shared in the cost and
operation of the four synthetic multi-purpose fields at our high schools. Guided by an .
Intergovernmental Agreement and a User Connnittee, the fields (and youth sports parks) have
been one of our most successful community collaborations. The fields at cat Young and
Madison Middle Schools could operate under similar arrangements.
We see other potential future opportunities in which the District and the City might jointly
develop and operate athletic fields to better serve community recreational needs including:
c A synthetic multi-purpose field at one middle school in the South region
Cl A synthetic multi-purpose field at one middle school in the Churchill region
a One or more athletics fields on some of the 40 acres in public ownership at Kinney
Loop (32 acres District and 8 acres City).
Given these opportunities, the City might consider adding these athletic field projects to the
Parks and Open Spaces plan.
Thank you for the consideration.
"',,,,--...,.
'---.,'"'
WEISS Carolyn J
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
COREY Kurt A
Monday, March 13,200610:21 AM
MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
FW: soccer fields
-----Original Message-----
From: TAYLOR Dennis M
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:15 AM
To: COREY Kurt A; JONES Angel L
Cc: CARLSON Jim R; MILLER Dawna A
Subject: FW: soccer fields
FYI--DMT
-----Original Message-----
From: jurgensoccer@comcast.net [mailto:jurgensoccer@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 10:05 AM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Subject: soccer fields
Dear mayor and city council members,
I have been a youth soccer coach in this community for the last 9 years in both
recreational (kidsports) and competitive (OUSA, EMFC) soccer teams. One of the most
frustrating experiences for the children that I coached was the lack of soccer fields in
this community. There is a growing youth soccer community (both boys and girls) on both
the recreational and competitive end of the spectrum. In addition, there is a growing
Latino community that already comes with a love for the sport of soccer.
While schools cancel PE classes and a growing public controversy entails youth obesity,
soccer teams become an important element to provide the children of this community with
enough fields to enjoy the game of soccer, their friends on the soccer team, and to get
the necessary exercise.
I have taken my teams to small patches of grass without goal posts, to muddy corners of
baseball fields, to go on runs for lack of fields, to sneak on UO turf fields, and to
other fields that were not planned for soccer practice. Most other coaching colleagues
that I know have had similar experiences.
What we need is a set of all-weather fields that can be used for soccer playing children
in this community. In my coaching experience in other cities in Oregon, nowhere is the
lack of fields as pressing as in this community. Springfield has just build a great
facility that has two all-weather turf fields. It seems that the size of Eugene
necessitates a similar complex or the transformation of some natural grass fields into
all-weather fields. If you have any questions about the need of soccer fields in this
area, ask the many kids that I coached over the years in this community (including their
parents who had to put up with inadequate fields far from home) .
I hope the city of Eugene can come up with some funds to provide more all-weather fields
or natural grass fields for the children in this community. Most of the existing fields
are not only used by soccer players but we share the fields with children who play
Ultimate Frisbee, football, lacrosse, and sometimes baseball players. All these children
need more space to play their games.
Please consider within your Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan the urgent need of
synthetic soccer fields for the children of this community.
Best Jurgen
Jurgen Ruckaberle
office: 541-346-3937
1
Message
Page 1 of 1
WEISS Carolyn J
From: CARLSON Jim R
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:56 AM
To: COREY Kurt A; MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: Athletic Fields
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck & Diane Tilby [mailto:cdtil@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, March 13,20067:01 PM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Subject: Athletic Fields
Dear Mayor and City Councilors,
I am the parent of 2 girls. One plays club soccer and the other plays recreational soccer. I have experienced this
sport and most of the others as a parent and coach and I must tell you that I am truly embarrassed by the status
of playing fields in the City. Competition for fields is extremely high and having one organization coordinating the
effort makes sense to me. However, the coordinating organization should not have a stake in the outcome as I
feel that Kidsports has taken care of themselves with little appreciation for clubs. A significant problem that they
have is a lack of available fields and the maintenance of the fields.
The number of fields in this community is extremely low, given the demand. High schools are rarely available and
the fields at Middle and Elementary schools are very poorly maintained (if at all). There have been times that I
gave up playing on a field because of its condition and found other, private, locations. For a city that claims to be
involved in their youth, we should all be embarrassed. The school districts do not help, and I understand they are
an impediment to good maintenance because of their rules and they have not been helpful in working with
parenUcoaches (unless, of course, you would like to do your own maintenance).
There has to be a recognition that we live in rain country and grass fields will have limited use. There is a serious
need for turf fields that are available. The only non-school turf fields that I'm aware of are in Springfield (of
course, this gets into a whole other discussion).
Please invest in the parks infrastructure for people who want to do something with parks and facilities other than
walk their dog and lay on the grass. That is one use, but the recreational users are suffering.
Chuck Tilby
Resident of Eugene for 28 years
4/14/2006
Message
Page 1 of 1
WEISS Carolyn J
From: CARLSON Jim R
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 9:01 AM
To: COREY Kurt A; MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: Turf fields
-----Original Message-----
From: Irobe88845@comcast.net [mailto: Irobe88845@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, March 13,20062:41 PM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Subject: Turf fields
I want to offer my input regarding turf fields for the youth of our community.
I am 100% in favor of developing more fields for the children who participate in athletic activities.
The resources we have now, are pathetic and two few for the number of participants.
Rather than building dog pens, I would suggest that the children and youth should come first. Other communities
put a high priority on these kinds of projects for their communities. Go visit Medford, or Bend or any of the
Portland areas, you will find community built and supported Fields for their youth. Corvallis also offers such a
complex.
We spend a lot of time, effort and money on things that do not benefit most of the people most of the time.
This community needs a nice sports complex, a large sports complex.
We have a miriad of Club Sports that are very competative. These Clubs draw competitiors from all areas of the
state and beyond. These organizations do enhance our area with visitors, who spend money. We need to step up
to the plate and offer a decent space for everyone.
It is embarassing to have a Portland team come to Eugene to play in our case, soccer. We are allocated to some
back field some where, that is hard to find, full of chuck holes and poorly maintained, while just a few yards from
this same field a nice Turf field sits being unused. You should have to listen to the comments of the visitors in this
situation, certainly not complimentary at all.
This city, Eugene, has a terrible reputation throughout the state, the city that gets nothing done. Do I like hearing
that, no I do not, but it is true.
Lets build some turf fields for our youth, we will never run out of them, so lets support our most valuable resource.
Thank you,
Lorna Roberts
Eugene, Oregon 97405
4/14/2006
Message
Page 1 of 1
WEISS Carolyn J
From: CARLSON Jim R
Sent: Tuesday, March 14,20064:00 PM
To: MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: PROS Plan and Field Development
-----Original Message-----
From: evonmieko@comcast.net [mailto: evonmieko@comcast. net]
Sent: Monday, March 13, 2006 1:14 PM
To: *Eugene Mayor and City Council
Subject: PROS Plan and Field Development
Hello Mayor Piercy and City Council members,
Tonight as you discuss the PROS plan, please picture thousands of soccer playing boys and girls of all
ages as well as hundreds of soccer playing adults of all abilities looking for fields to practice and play on
during our rainy months. This community has too few synthetic turf fields for the kinds of year-round
athletics that people in our area enjoy playing. While we have allleamed to share scarce spaces, the
shortage is frustrating and incomprehensible for a community of our size. As we visit other small cities
throughout the state, we can see how different communities have provided adequate facitilies
for growing numbers of recreational and competitive athletes. Besides the soccer players mentioned
above, there are leagues of ultimate frisbee, lacrosse, football, and rugby teams who search for places to
play throughout the year. The PROS plan provides a perfect opportunity for this community to address
these needs. Please do not forget about active sports facilities as you debate and revise this plan.
Thank you,
Evon Smith
President Eugene Metro Futbol Club
4/14/2006
Message
Page 1 of 1
WEISS Carolyn J
From: COREY Kurt A
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 8:13 AM
To: MEDLIN Johnny R; WEISS Carolyn J
Subject: FW: Soccer Fields
m--Orig i na I Message-----
From: TAYLOR Dennis M
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:28 PM
To: COREY Kurt A; CARLSON Jim R; JONES Angel L
Cc: MILLER Dawna A
Subject: FW: Soccer Fields
FYI--DMT
-----Original Message-----
From: MARKOBASS@aol.com [mailto:MARKOBASS@aol,com]
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 3:26 PM
To: TAYLOR Dennis M
Subject: Soccer Fields
Mr. Taylor,
We need more soccer fields especially turf. My four kids love outdoor activities(l.E. Soccer and frisbee). This
would be an asset for our community.
Sincerly,
Mark Bassett
4/14/2006
'D '
i LJ b 1\ C h.,y\) r'V)
'-\[lbIDIp
<.'."""'''0.
EUGENE. DREIiON (Region 53]
P.O. BOX 2998
Eugene, OR 97402
April 10, 2006
Council Member:
I am the Regional Coach Administrator for Eugene American Youth Soccer Organization (A YSO). Eugene
A YSO is the local region for the fastest growing youth sports organization in the nation. We have over
650,000 youth soccer players enrolled over 50 states. In the Eugene region, when I started coaching my
daughter four years ago, we had slightly more than 400 players. This year, we have registered over 1,400
soccer players who play Spring and Fall seasons as well as Summer camps.
We are a 100% volunteer driven organization. Unlike any of the other soccer clubs in the Eugene area, we
do not have any paid administrators, coaches or referees. We provide a soccer program for anyone between
the ages of 5 and 19 who wants to play soccer regardless of ability or economic position. Last year, we
even introduced our VIP program which accommodates physically or mentally challenged soccer players.
Additionally, we are one of three Class One youth sports clubs that the City has directed to provide after
school sports for 4J schools. Though we receive no funding from the City or the schools, we are still held
responsible for helping to provide after school programs. Because of our long-time belief in the importance
of children and their physical well-being, this is a mandate that Eugene A YSO has readily and willingly
accepted. However, it is becoming more and more difficult to find adequate soccer fields that are in good
repair and not a danger to our players.
It is for this reason that I urge you to add funding to the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Project for the
explicit purpose of upgrading athletic fields throughout Eugene. We are not asking for the purchase of
additional fields. Rather, we are looking to upgrade the existing fields that are currently in Eugene. Many
of these were poorly designed and now have become dangerous due to low or non-existent maintenance.
The safety of our players, both on and off the field, is of utmost concern. A YSO prides itself on providing a
safe environment for its players by completing background checks on all volunteers and training every
volunteer to do his or her job. It seems shameful that the fields don't reflect this same commitment to the
kids.
If these fields were upgraded to artificial turf, we could truly use them year round. Please help us meet the
charge that the City has imposed upon us and provide funding to upgrade these existing fields.
Thank you,
Joe~~
Regional Coach Administrator
541- 484-1149
http://eugeneayso.org
/'
"
lZ6bfV\L-~ ~\e.. ? H-: f e.os p (b~<L<.t ~
rri~G\~t
4 "D I DIo
A Petition for the Renovation of the Alton Baker Canoe Canal
Everyone loves pond scum, right? Probably not, or the canoe canal at Alton Baker Park
would be in more use. The canal is fed by the Willamette at the west end of the park, and runs
back into the Willamette near the duck ponds. When it was put in thirty years ago, it was meant to
be used for leisure recreation, such as bird watching and canoeing. It may be used for those things
now, but far less frequently, due to the decline it has come under. Green algae cover much of the
surface, and ugly blackbefl)' bushes intrude from the sides of the river. Coupled with the ugly
concrete and five-foot shelves in the middle of the river, it isn't a very desirable, or even safe,
place to be. This could all change however, if the canal "'ere to be changed into a whitewater park
with a focus on also helping out the local wildlife. The concrete would be ripped out and replaced
with boulders which, while creating an excellent habitat for fish, would also channel the current
to create waves and rapids which could be utilized by kayakers, surfers, body boarders inner
tubers, and swimmers. This could also increase tourism and make it possible to have kayaking
and river surfing competitions held here in Eugene. Signing this petition says that you agree that
the canoe canal should be made into a ecologically friendly are while integrating rapids and
waves into the canal which could be used recreationally. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
SIGNATURES! 11<+ ~'(Y\.I'\~~'" "\ ~ ~~ \
\ ~---~~___~~~l~_____________________________________________________~________________
'-L ---~JLt~--ftft---:JCJGG~~--------------------------------------__________________________
.~ -~-~--- ~~ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
~____ j~~L: _~_~~~ ~_ _____________________________________________________________________________
::=~~~-;:::-.::::::::::::::::::--=::::::::::::::::--=.--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--~-~--~------~----------- - ----------------------------------------------------
----,---~~~--- ~----~-----------1-------- -~-- --------------------------------------------------
'r.~Jl.(---------- ~~-----'='___,_---------:' ____________________________________________________
c\---~--C--~ -~~~~~~----------------------------------------------------
\ J --- . --&tt;e.:h.]t:--~---------------------------------------------------
\'~ tl-~~~------.:=:=-:::::::::::::=::::=::::::::=:::::::::::::::::::::::=::=:::=
1':__~~--__~~jc~~-tA---~,JL~~~~---------------------------___________________________________
~:~; ..~~~~-~~---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\,;- -~~--~~~~-----:-----------------------------------------------------------------~-----
.~--- -- L~-~-~~r -------------__________________________________________~___________
<,I; ,
\1~---~~ / --- ------------------~----------------------------------------------------------------------
----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'!_--- ~~j(~---jl~-~----------------~------------------------------------------------------------------
, " .
...
'l(
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -- -----~---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------.-------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(~
-')
'"
A Petition for the Renovation of the Alton Baker Canoe Canal
Everyone loves pond scum, right? Probably not, or the canoe canal at Alton Baker Park
would be in more use. The canal is fed by the Willamette at the west end of the park, and runs
back into the Willamette near the duck ponds. When it was put in thirty years ago, it was meant to
be used for leisure recreation, such as bird watching and canoeing. It may be used for those things
now, but far less frequently, due to the decline it has come under. Green algae cover much of the
surface, and ugly blackberry bushes intrude from the sides of the river. Coupled with the ugly
concrete and five-foot shelves in the middle of the river, it isn't a very desirable, or even safe,
place to be. This could all change however, if the canal were to be changed into a whitewater park
with a focus on also helping out the local wildlife. The concrete would be ripped out and replaced
with boulders which, while creating an excellent habitat for fish, would also channel the current
to create waves and rapids which could be utilized by kayakers, surfers, body boarders inner
tubers, and swimmers. This could also increase tourism and make it possible to have kayaking
and river surfing competitions held here in Eugene. Signing this petition says that you agree that
the canoe canal should be made into a ecologically friendly are while integrating rapids and
waves into the canal which could be used recreationally. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
SIGNATURES!
1-:!__~J:t1~~_~~~:::;____________________________________________________________________________
1l!_~l'~tLJl--~-----------------------______________________________________________________
1 " 1A 1.-1<_ _~~~
.~~----L~~~ _~~~~-----;:--------------------------------------------_______________________________
_ --~-------. _______________~J,(L_JC::__________________ _.----------------------------------------------------
?~_______ ~~~-~-~~-----------------------------------------------_______________________
\1 ',11"' .,..--./"'1 ('~ t"<o....A...-...C....~..-.-"J.---.......
---___ ____~~~4~__~c.__~-~-~--~_--------------------~----------___________________________________
~':_-~-~~----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~:~~~~Z;;-~vt~~~-~~~l--------------------------------------------------------------------
1i"---~~--ZJ - --~r-----------------------------------------------------------------------
''J ~.lf~~~- - - .- -_ ____ _~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~:~~:
~~~-~~~- - -- - ----~---~----------------------------------------------------------
,~';-----~--- -~~- ~~~-----------I--------------------------------------------------------------
----------- - -l~_ttJl_____~~JCl~~~--------------------------------------___________________
~\ L_~~--~~~~~~~-----------------------------------~-----_____________________
4.. ~--~~~~------L.l~--~-\----------------------------------_________________________________________
::~----~~--~~~~---------------~-------------------------------------------------------
::....~.~~-~. --:~D~~~~~~~--::--~----:-~~~~~~::~::::~:::~:::::::::~:~:::::::::::::~::~~:~:~:::::::~:
-___ ~~~~~~Cl- ____________________________________________________________________________________
~;;~-- ll~~~----- -~---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--~-----------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------------------
(~
I
"
.
(i)
A Petition for the Renovation of the Alton Baker Canoe Canal
Everyone loves pond scum, right? Probably not, or the canoe canal at Alton Baker Park
would be in more use. The canal is fed by the Willamette at ~west end of the park, and runs
back into the Willamette near the duck ponds. When it was put in thirty years ago, it was meant to
be used for ~ recreation, such as bird watching and canoeing. It may be used for those things
now, but far letJ'frequently, due to the decline it has come under. Green algae cover much of the
surface, and ugly blackberry bushes intrude from the sides of the river. Coupled with the ugly
concrete and five-foot shelves in the middle of the river, it isn't a very desirable, or even safe,
place to be. This could all change however, if the canal were to be changed into a whitewater park
with a focus on also helping out the local wildlife. The concrete would be ripped out and replaced
with boulders which, while creating an excellent habitat for fish, would also channel the current
to create waves and rapids which could be utilized by kayakers, surfers, body boarders inner
tubers, and swimmers. This could also increase tourism and make it possible to have kayaking
and river surfing competitions held here in Eugene.@gning this petition says that you agree that
the canoe canal should be made into a ecologically frIendly are while integrating rapids and
waves into the canal which could be used recreationally. WE APPRECIATE YOUR
SIGNATURES! ~.~ ~~
u~: ___ " . _ __ __~__ J:::::::',:~:::::-,;;,______~_~__ _lk...... _ l_2__f::___Q_~.--.- .--.~-----_-------
l.,o:;.. nil A \/lA k 0 L -r..... A~.. ~
S ,---H.J,i.t., -.,~-- -~- --------------------qvr:.-K: -Cj-ce..~-y,:;~;or--------------------
--~,.~c--~~3'---------------~~-- _ __ . . '.' ____________________
S.~_____JL::~~~-:~::::-----------------------------~~ _________ _____~:~~-------_______________
~~---~~-.v~~~-------------_~_______________________~2C: ~~~~~L::--~-----_________________
s~--~~t~~~----,----~-.------------------------~~~ ( ~~-~if~~-~:----------~------------------
:'.~~.-- ~-r-~-lr-------~~-------- -------------------~~~~~-~~-:~::it:, --;~.--i-~----:-::--~-------t:~~
S~..-;;f~----~j--klL -- - ----------------------gP\-- - .. fLY:.np.-~-L--e.as..--uP
~---~~~ . -~---~!"---------------------Ct~~-- _~l.\_~~-~~~-~------------
--~~~ .;.~~-~t'-L-----------------------------JEi!~~--~1:------~-~-___________
S.'k----~~- . .~~~..~J.~~---------------------~~---~--~~-:i:~~-- ________________
(,,0 ~Ilt, ". l) q '] ~\J\ n.... ~._'t1
------------ -----,~---------------------------------_!._- --- ~~~-~-- - -------------
~,1_______1.~_~_______________________________~\~_ _ ~~____\)_~~__ _______________________
(;;:-----~~-------------------_________!l~__~-i~-~~~~. ~_____________________
r 7.. ./ (;\ _. .
\f:.~ ~ /~.\ -r, ~.' " _ ,_'.n ,
.~..-----.-~..--.-------~t----~ -.--~-~-----~--------------------7~ ~.r-- ii-- ~-.- - - ---------------------
(-" ~. '-'-i..~~. ~ "'l Ii :aA--=)
,,~~---- ~-- -- ----------J~-~~-------------(~~:- - -a~~;:~-------------------------
--- - . ----~. .' -- . ------------------------------ . ---------~-m------------------------
,,~, .. '. . '_S ' ~
~ ---~.~. ~~--~.-------------------~~.' _:24}J_.~~-----~.. __.-------------------------
( 1:--~ce~--.rJriffi----------------------1~~---t1~.n:hu...-.llr:);I'.'-~------------~------------
~!---~~~~--~~-------------------~-~--~-~~~----------- r.
---~-- -~1-:;-~:~~-~-----------------------1-0~--~~-JJ0t~------------------------
~-- ----- xt;:~---------------------~-C~----- ~1;tl--C{J.~~~-----------------
,---- ~-~------~------------------------------------~-------!;JL-------tr--~~--------------------------
il----~____~__________________________~~:i___~~___~1~---________________________ ~
,7.S----0~~-----------:---------.L~;:-JJ1~~---~~-6------________
~-~~-~~~-------------------------~~~~~--------~;;;'~~~--------------
~-~---~-ltJ:~~~-~-----------------------lftJ:-___~_:~-~r~~-------------
:t~-~~-~l~~------------------------------~~----~-~~~~-:7~---------
-+:T-Jo hn f.-~~[I>flP-\;'~ S hver' !/ !
<) c;.,!J. ..-~UA \_1
I . \l . -:- - \.\0\
')0-:5 0l, CN1
J
()
(i
:)
U
"-
a
~
\/'
~
~
~
~
~ /'~. 'tW/~. /~
/' /. .
v /.'
, f/
)
-.--..-,....
~ '"-::::::.
\ I D KJJX1~1
\ \ I J"~~bt~
\\l J3mJGVlafJ!
l\)'~~
l LLt 10clAM ~\u ,
,'- .~ ,\.
r"
, . J. \..
I II )
. ,':
. ~ - ,
~.
",:Ib:, """,~
,"
< . .
, .
.~.
.'
.....
BrlA Le M \A..L t, J <J...r)
PH', P'\a:::, PrQ.)~ct- +-
Pn t>r\~ G. ~1-
4-( I() I Db
January 27, 2005
RESOLUTION
Before the membership of the Hendricks Hills Homeowners Association at
its annual meeting.
WHEREAS, the City of Eugene is considering a potential land transaction
that would place approximately 120 acres of developable land in the Laurel
Valley area (the "McDougal Property") outside the urban growth boundary;
WHEREAS, the 120 acre ridgeline parcel is a unique natural habitat
comprised of western hemlock, conifer, oak and hardwood savannah
connecting Moon Mountain and Hendricks Park natural areas;
WHEREAS, said transaction would include acquisition of the parcel by the
City as a natural reserve allowing for future expansion of the ridgeline trail
system; and
WHEREAS, the Hendricks Hill PUD directly abuts said property and its
residents as a result are most directly affected by any future development.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT:
RESOL YED that the Hendricks Hills Homeowners Association and its
membership strongly support any action of the City Council to limit future
development through the acquisition of this unique parcel as a natural
preserve outside the UGB.
f.lt .\)'; cd rtot-. k~ ~. M-t> ~ ~(.e
A/rDI~fo 4-~lfc W~~U st.
, _ '4tAM-,t ~ tA.1'foIL
~f\ c:~ ~~: ,,'
~II'" tl' 'kJ' vwi~{4Y\ ~tlll/:'~ ~~ 141J.
~1 WI.~i~1\.v ~ rMk ~ ~ C;~u-' 1'7 ~ wvo-S-t
~v.t~'lj ~flV1'~. ,~
1: V(Mvi;J. ~ -tWJ- ~ rrLoS ~(~
y~ ,~~ CMfl1f~~~f6fkA I~ '
oP1lM~M 111 ~f ~rlN'"t~ ,p "MOst Ve~1f~.
, ~~p 17 s .Q.\, . ~ ~ +0 t{ CCdvV\,IdM-e-
Ilk V\A{, ~ ~ ~k.IA ekCUH'
, ~. o{Nv pOvV~ ',' ~ ~I-"Oj uK vvt fA
tY-\l1Yl~.i\: 1-, ~ ~c>.J ~(Ufre MfA"t}- h.s- -t,tp~
()Jt~IJ UJ ~ wvill(1YI -r;r l~ ~ ~'hi.vt- ~ /
uJV~~ ~ 1-- J.Mt~. ' '
, ,~~ \AMJ. tWlM."lAJ,lt ~ o~ ~P~UI V"IV&
~Ct<t'c,~ t-lCl'f"",,^ ~ ~UW rzJ.. a:wA ye{ d\1tVce (~
~~ ~ ~ IS rlvp{ot~. ~M~ cl~.
\t jlNill lNr\- ~ ~/J -h ttOt w"ye (f ~ ~
\,\flt u..o\-. ~ ~t, ~ i\#- <tlf P ~-\1MAi~ ~
eYtWf.(, GWY uv-l\'\ ~~ .\'\LvI?lA-U . - a. [IVij/,
~{'fA1W\Y:J ~t ~f 01t\IV" V\~'. [t WIll ..., cYtaf-"l-
\{Y\vJ,fW\.e ~0~ ...C\-O;\rtV dv.1{ ( o{~ w~
w. Asp ac~ -to 5' P V' .( JOv\t · ooA 1I bCil S" 1'& jIl U~ 5
~ --Y\MS-t \llJi~ i" I"CHftS1W)\~ ~J..t4. CD
Covttlt~~s. M'f$it'7.E1 -fLu.- 9f~i~..
tv ~(ltVt~ tl plfA.c~ ~ ~ ,ttt{ ((lie WI#.< v
i '
,
~'~
,t
,\.
u"".,
, l. t
-, ,&
,i ~'/<~
'...~..~.
,'. .... "\. .< U
~ , ','If \\
~~,
"
,
,; :.
I
i
J " "
tf -
~
\
(i')
~ c >
:3' ~ j€ff ~ I
~ i Ic3ri w 8
j ~ ~i~~ ~.llli
I n! ~ ~~ll ~h6
~ ~Ii ~ <: ~.;;<: ~81l~
~ ~JII! 1.1 ~ tUJ ~ III
~ jl~i ~j; ~ J; ~ . . .
~ j~li~ ~ b~; 1 ~j Jld 2
lH lDl;I:~il < ;I:.!.!'- - ., 11: w <:5~., <
~ Uf t~ ~ IJi~l ~ ~ <:~~ 5 o~tj~! ~r 11
>,B.:i>1I:l! w::>oll~j" D.. "'?Oi 011~;I: Z18 !I
t:Cl180<:OD.."i"2_~ ffia:U)~ll WC1~.li!1l 001 e
~ ~En~ ~'i~l!b !ziije ~ t-8ll~~ ffii<:s~
~ ~:t3U III U58~ i z~d1~ ~ o~U).s'! :t ....~~.=
0..... a:..... w.... z..... w....
U 0 Z w ...,
@ @) @ @ i@
w
Cl
o
w
U)
o
z
::>
li?.g
(!)~
a:.<:
_U)
::i
o
~i
~e
-;I:
~~
D....
za:
ol~
!:t -
::;; l!
-< otf
I ;1:;1:
Ii' ~~
~. .
@
&1&
~ If
fl ~
8. ~I.~
~ ~ 8
llll :ll
C
It i
i~1l JJl ~
.c~~,"-~. ~
<:~li. E
"'ijjj~L<
C:ol::.e(S.s
g~gfL,!;~
E~-g -!'i
oC~c ~ ~
I
;d t i
C -fS 0 E:;
!';:;:~O E
"iUlull
:I gfi.A:~i
E .011'0
H-g-- s
(,)+:o ~ {!
..I
~
~
~
o
H.HtHtHHtO
H-HtH+HtHIJ
Ili!l:IW';I~
I,.. ,iI.,
IIIII ill i 1111~
z
-<
....:l
Z ~~
O <~
Cl"JZ~~
~oz~
~N~~
~<~t
~~=~
e; < ~8
~
'"
j
8
'.
j
~
-~
:to
i'
;1 ' '"
. ,1J:-~
,~~,..
!~m
:~~ .
~~1 ~J
iii
A
a.-
.JF
~
.9
~
~
-t
S<~
~>s-
~~
eeL ?J
..c..a
() :f;-==-
f/e-:r
. .
Vobl)L f=-DfUr--.
Ltt \\J\ ~\l
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Projects
and Priority Plan. My name is Bob Chandler and I too am one of the owners of locally owned
Tactics Boardshop and have also lived in Eugene for over 10 years.
Tonight I am advocating you to think about one of Eugene's most under-utilized open space
/ assets - the Washington'-Jefferson Street Park. In sum, I believe this Park would be the perfect
location for a new downtown skate park and that the city of Eugene needs a flagship covered
skatepark in this location. This would be the right project to include in a city bond measure:
The Washington-Jefferson Park corridor area is perfectly situated to support a large covered
skatepark by incorporating the bridge overpass into the skatepark siting. Furthermore, due to its
urban location, the facility could be lit without disruption to residential uses.
As you know, after years of hard work from Parks Department staff, and through interviews,
surveys, workshops, and focus groups, the final PROS plan was recently completed. This plan
listed providing a centrally located skate park as a levell priority for the City Central sub-area.
This decision was not 'J;p'ive~afwithout a great deal of input and support from the community.
)'
For those of you who don't a dy know, skateboarding is huge! In 2003, skateboarding
participation nationwide was pstimated to be over 11 million. This is roughly the same
participation level as baseba: American Sports Data group projected that skateboarding may
have had over 14 million participants in 2005. Overall, skateboarding participation grew over
80% between 1998 and 2002. Most importantly, participation in the Pacific Northwest has
probably grown even faster than the nation on the whole. Skateboarding provides an active, .
healthy activity for our youth and is particularly appealing to kids not interested in traditional
team sports such as basketball and football.
~
.,
Building a flagship covered, lit, skatepark, will not be cheap. Our preliminary research shows
that we need to budget at least $400,000 to do it right. Recognizing that the private sector may
need to help fill any funding gaps, we have formed a 501(c)(3) non-profit, the Eugene
Skateparks Fund, and are awaiting our tax exempt letter ruling from the IRS . We are committed
to helping Eugene and its skateboarders get the flagship skatepark that it deserves and hope you
will be too.
Thanks for your time.
Ct)
Robert Chandler
2467 University
Eugene, OR 97403
Matthew Patton
63 West 220d Ave.
Eugene, OR 97405
April 1, 2005
Andrea Riner
Parks and Open Space Planning Manager
City of Eugene, Parks & Open Space Division
1820 Roosevelt Blvd.
Eugene, OR 97402
RE: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Comprehensive Plan
Dear Andrea:
We are writing to comment on the Skate Parks section of the PROS Comprehensive Plan, Draft Parks and
Open Space Analysis as well as the recent release of the complete Draft PROS Comprehensive Plan. As
you know, skateboarding has seen strong growth over the past several years, with overall participation up
by 81 % and frequent participation (defined as 52+ days per year) surging by 173% between 1998 and
2002 (SGMA International, 2003). In 2003, skateboarding participation nationwide was estimated to be
over 11 million. This is roughly the same participation level as baseball. Worldwide, skateboarding also
continues to grow and skate parks continue to be built i.n Europe, South America, and Australia.
Skateboarding provides an active, healthy activity for our youth and is particularly appealing to kids not
interested in traditional team sports such as basketball and football.
With regards to the "Findings/Trends" section of the report on pages 47-48, we would make the following
observations:
1) Point 2 states that "according to the Community Survey, skateboarding is the least popular
activity in terms of participation." Thi~ appears to be a somewhat misleading interpretation of the
data that wa~.collected in this Survey. Clearly, skateboarding is more appealing to youth aged
10-17 and more meaningful participation conclusions should be drawn from demographic
specific analysis, such as was attempted in Point 1.
2) Point 3 makes perhaps the most important point of this section, which is that skateparks are
considered by Eugene's youth to be one of the most needed facilities in our community.
3) Point 4 is also rather deceptive by citing the NSGA estimates of a 0.5% growth in skateboarding
since 2001. As mentioned, national participation in skateboarding has grown 81 % between 1998
and 2002 and American Sports Data Group projects that skateboarding may have over 14 million
participants in 2005. Casual observations have also noted a far higher growth in skateboarding in
the Northwest in the past several years. This conclusion is drawn not only from discussions with
skateboard industry representatives, but also from observations of the growth in the number and
usage of skateparks in other Oregon towns.
4) Point 6 follows on the heels of Point 3 with the logical observation that not only is there
consistent demand for more skating facilities, but that the demand is most acute for all-weather
facillties. It is difficult if not impossible to skateboard in the rain.
(i)
. ,
As the report points out, there are only 5 community skateparks in Eugene and all are very modest in size.
In light of Eugene's population, the continuing growth of and interest in skateboarding from our local
youth, and the community's lack of skating facilities, it is perfectly clear that the city of Eugene needs to
build another skatepark as soon as possible. On page 48, the report notes "the City Central sub-area
should be a priority." Other parts of the report point out that youth, especially teens, should be the
highest priority for increased services. All of these factors point toward constructing Eugene's first
flagship covered skatepark at the underutilized Washington-Jefferson Park.
The Washington-Jefferson Park area is perfectly situated to support a large covered skatepark by
incorporating the bridge overpass into the skatepark siting. Furthermore, due to its urban location, the
facility could be lit without disruption to residential uses. In order to gauge interest in a skatepark at this
location, Tactics Boardshop skate team members circulated a supporting petition last year and
received over 1,600 signatures from local residents in just a few weeks. A copy of this petition is
attached, along with the explanatory cover sheet that accompanied the signature form.
Andrea, the time has come to make building a large covered, lit skatepark at the Washington-Jefferson
skatepark a priority for the Eugene Parks and Recreation Department. This skatepark could even be part
of a larger public plaza upgrade to this urban park. We are acutely aware of the financial restraints your
department faces in these times. However, we are willing to personally dedicate our efforts and resources
to helping your Department acquire the funds necessary to build this skatepark. Although we have not
received any formal bids, our preliminary research indicates that we will need to secure between $350-
400,000 to build a large and diverse, covered, lit skatepark at the Washington-Jefferson Park. If the city
commits to siting a skatepark at this location and cannot secure cornplete funding to build the skatepark,
we are willing to spearhead efforts to attempt to raise up to half the total funds from private donors. Our
hope is that we can work together to obtain any remaining funding from other government sources and
matching grants.
The time is now to get this project off the ground. The PROS Comprehensive Plan has been a valuable
tool for charting the future of Parks & Recreation in Eugene and we are very pleased to see the most
recent Draft plan list providing a covered centrally located skatepark as a Priority 1 initiative (p. 60). We
hope your Department will formally articulate a, commitment to building a skatepark at the Washington-
Jefferson Park in the final PROS Plan. We look forward to hearing from you in the near future so that we
can talk about making this vision a reality. Thank you for your time;
Best regards,
Robert Chandler
&
Matthew Patton
cc: Eugene Mayor, Kitty Piercy
Eugene City Council Members
Lane County Commissioners
4J Board of Directors
4J High School Principals
4J Middle School Principals
Eugene Chief of Police, Robert Lehner
Kidsports Executive Director, Jim Torrey
(j)
BUILD IT!
Washington/Jefferson Bridge Skate Park
City of Eugen~Citizen Petition
Overview: This is an informal petition to demonstrate citizen support for building a downtown
skatepark in underutilized areas of the Washington/Jefferson Park area near the 1-105 onramp.
This petition will be presented to the City Council, Parks & Rec, and the Mayor's Office.
Any information collected will not be used for commercial purposes.
What: A partially covered and lighted skatepark open to all ages. The design of the park would allow
for use by all levels of skateboa.rders from beginners to advanced and incorporate the widest range
of obstacles and terrain. Skate parks are urban recreation centers created for skateboarders and
rollerbladers.
Who: The skatepark will benefit all of Eugene, especially our youth. Skateboarding is a healthy,
athletic activity and is an important recreational outlet for all participants, especially youngsters who
are not as interested in group sports. Participation has been growing rapidly for the last decade and
the total number of skateboarders in the United States now exceeds 10 million.
Why: "A healthy body fuels the mind!" Like all positive youth recreational activities, skateparks
keep kids away from the TV and video games, allowing them to interact with their peers and channel
their energy. Also, everyone knows, it rains in Eugene! Building a roof over at least a part of the park
or perhaps utilizing the highway as part of the roof, kids would have a year-around center instead
of one dependent on our fickle weather.
Where: The Washington/Jefferson Park area is a city park encompassing approximately 10 square blocks
underneath the 1-105 doWntown bridge. There is ample underutilized land that is perfectly suited for
use as an urban skatepark. Constructing a larger flagship skatepark in this central location would be a
perfect complementto the city's outlying smaller skateparks in the north, south, and west of town. It would
also provide an alternative to the Springfield skatepark that ,is in the far eastern edge of the metro area.
When: If the City of Eugene Parks and Recreation Department incorporates the skatepark construction
into their Parks Comprehensive Plan currently in progress, construction could start as early as the summer
of 2004 and be completed by the spring 2005.
How: Funding is always an issue, especially in these fiscally constrained times. However, communities
around the state from Lincoln City and Newburg to Medford and Redmond have demonstrated that with
grass roots support as well as a clear direction from civic and political leaders, skateparks can.be built in short
periOdS of time. Funds for the project are likely to be derived from a partnership of public and private sources.
The total construction costs will likely be approximately $350,000.
@
Table 1: Proposed Projects & Priorities for Parks, Open Space
and Recreation Facilities continued
Acquire land to provide significant riverfront open space within courthouse/cannery
neighborhood
Acquire land in front of SMJ House
Acquire land to expand park blocks
Implement plan for Jefferson Area Greenway and linear park
Acquire land at 4J Admin site to expand River House and Rose Garden for special
event site
Acquire land to provide urban open space within Courthouse neighborhood
Develop millrace linear park
1
1
3
5
4
5
NEW RECREATION FACILITIES
Provide covered centrally located skate park with bicycle facilities 1
Provide children's play area in downtown area 2
Provide interpretive facilities and trails at Skinner Butte Park, enhance accessibility 3
Develop multi-cultural community center/aquatic center in Whiteaker/Skinner Butte area 4
Develop environmental education site behind River House 4
Develop an off leash dog area in City Central 5
Develop visual arts center 5
IMPROVING EXISTING FACILITIES
Re-develop West University Park 1
Upgrade Charnel Mulligan Park 1
Complete second phase of River House Master Plan 4
Upgrade Campbell Center with fitness center 3
Implement Skinner Butte Park Master Plan 3&4
Upgrade Sladden Park 4
Upgrade Scobert Gardens 5
Implement Rose Garden master plan 5
Implement SMJ House plan, including parking and access across railroad tracks 5
Upgrade Monroe Park 5
ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Develop pedestrian improvements to link downtown with Skinner Butte Park, SMJ
house, and riverfront system (excluding pedestrian bridge at train station)
Facilitate Eugene Iink,to Pacific Crest Trail by developing connections from bikepath to
ridge line and proposed Willamalane riverfront system
2&3
5
2
(' c..:;).c-. .
,,2../
v
Public Testimony Re:
Eugene City Council meeting of April 10, 2006 Agenda item 5. Public Hearing:
Resolution 4863 Approving the Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Project and Priority Plan
Dear Eugene Mayor and City Councilors,
Please direct staff to gather more public input on the revised PROS "Project List" Plan as
it was only posted on the internet and was made available in the public library on April 6,
2006. The general public has not had a chance to comprehend the changes made since
City Council's decision to adopt one half of the plan by administrative order andlor
resolution and claiming the decision was not a land use decision.
I would like to advocate for the $1.8 million riverfront land acquisitions in the
Willakenzie area to complete the 1970's Willamette Greenway Plan that would provide
safe bicycle access to Armitage State Park and potentially future River Delta Triad
Hospital. The current priority one land acquisitions slated for the Willakenzie area are
mostly neighborhood parks that do not provide natural or inner-connected natural habitat.
This could be seen as a citywide community asset and become part of that area's priority
one allocation projects. Make as much sense as land acquisition for completion of the
ridgeline system don't you think?
One of the priority one land acquisition's, "Gillespie butte access and natural areas" is
not needed as it is called out in the Willakenzie Area Refinement plan, that future
development shall make allowances for such a connection. Therefore $212,500 could be
reallocated towards natural riverfront habitat land acquisition.
Please ask staffto remove the Stricker Field sports complex in the Willakenzie area, as
this proposed project is not supported by the data received during public comment on the
draft PROS Plan when it when to the separate project district areas. I am applauded by
the fact that without public notice the Parks Department staff can re-designate a
neighborhood park to a community park without due public process! This would create
three Sports Park Facilities within a 2 mile radius. That is excessive, particularity when
the Belt1ine and Coburg Road is already a congestion nightmare!
How many 1989 PRCP projects have yet been built that are still viable projects. Should
not those projects that have been on the waiting list for 16 years go to the top of the new
list?
I would ask staff to try to balance active recreation based land acquisitions with passive
habitat based land acquisition in particular in the Willakenzie area and Citywide. Since it
is well known that active recreation land acquisition costs and operations and
Page 1 of2
maintenance costs are many times that of habitat based costs, and it would be wise to
actually have the ratio based on total costs of each park type to make it financially
responsible.
The multi-use field's 8 year $500,000 turf replacement costs should be considered
general maintenance, and the turf should be coming out of user fees! That ongoing
expense should not be born by the general public.
I would like to ask that City Council keep the record open as long a time a possible due to
limited time availability of the revised project list.
I do not like the idea of adopting a "living plan or project list" that can be changed by
staff and/or council, but I would much rather see a control of the project list be
implemented by the general public.
The Public has not been given adequate time to consider the growth allocated to each
area and the impact of what type of park development would raise system development
charges the most. I would bet a natural based project list would show a reduction in
System Development Charges as apposed to a project list favoring active recreation. I
don't think we have the right priorities because they are based on time and funding and
not long term community goals to be "The greatest city of the arts and outdoors".
Respectfully submitted,
Charles Biggs
540 Antelope Way,
Eugene, OR 97401
Page 2 of2
WEISS Carolyn J
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
WEBER Doug (SMTP)
Tuesday, March 07, 200610:43 AM
WEISS Carolyn J; *Eugene Mayor and City Council; roxieA@hbalanecounty.org
Parks Project List
These remarks are intended for use by the mayor and city council in
their meeting of March 13th, 2006 regarding the proposed Parks Project
List. I am not able to attend this meeting due to a work related
conflict. I am a member of the SDC Rates advisory committee and have
expressed these concerns to staff in various meetings. The amount of
land to be acquired seems to be excessive to me. All of the land to be
acquired is residential land and further reduces the residential lands
inventory which is already woefully inadequate in the Eugene area. The
City's ability to pony up their share of the money is highly
questionable, leaving the only sure funding from SDC's. What if the
City is unable to pass a bond measure? What happens to the SDC's that
have been collected for these specific projects, which then would not be
able to come to fruition? I feel that the committee and staff that
developed this project list were too aggressive in their fervor to
acquire and develop parks. If this list were simply a "wish" list, I
would not be so concerned. However, it will serve as the project list,
required by state law, to set the monetary value of SDC's to be
collected on each building permit issued within the City of Eugene. I
suggest that the list be trimmed down, or broken into parts that could
be implemented as the ability of the City to pay the non-SDC portion of
the costs is guaranteed by the approval of a bond measure by the voters.
Doug Weber
1330 Flintridge Ave.
Eugene, OR 97401
1
~
Home Builders
ASSOCIATION
of Lane County
Mayor Piercy
Eugene City Council
City of Eugene
777 Pearl Street
Eugene, Oregon 98401
;'
~ Cf!fCe-lflJ!'
, y ~Jl <.70
~H J 'lN4G8
/ 2006 li
April 17, 2006
Dear Mayor Piercy and Councilors:
The Home Builders Association of Lane County appreciates the opportunity to submit written
comments on the proposed PROS Priority Plan and Project List and thanks the council for
keeping the record open for an additional week.
Our comments fall into two broad categories: (1) Our issues with the Growth Allocation, as
well as a proposed solution; and (2) A recommendation for additional neighborhood parks to
be added to the project list.
GROWTH ALLOCATION COMMENTS AND SOLUTION
All of us recognize that issues related to system development charges (SDCs) are often
complicated. The examination of the proposed Growth Allocations on the proposed project
list is no exception. Nevertheless, it is important that the council give its attention to the
matter, and I will try to keep the explanation of our concerns as transparent as possible. It
may be advisable, therefore, to provide a brief description of what the growth allocation is and
some rules that pertain to it.
SDCs are established and governed by state statutes ORS 223.297 to ORS 233.314. ORS
223.309(1) establishes the need for a project list, as well as additional information:
Prior to the establishment of a system development charge by ordinance or resolution, a
local government shall prepare a capital improvement plan, public facilities plan, master
plan, or comparable plan that includes a list of the capital improvements that the local
govemment intends to fund, in whole or in part, with revenues from an improvement fee
and the estimated cost timing, and percentages of costs eligible to be funded with
revenues from the improvement fee for each improvement (emphasis added).
(~-"...
, '
.,,~/
2053 Laura Street Springfield, OR 97477 (541) 484-5352 FAX: (541) 484-5386
This project list with the required timing, estimated costs, and percentage of costs eligible to
be funded with SDCs is often referred to as the 309 List.
The project list proposed by staff contains all of the elements required by the statute. The key
issue, however, is: What is the proper allocation of the project costs for growth? To
determine that, one has to go to another part of the SDC statute to determine what percentage
of the cost is eligible to be funded from the improvement fee for each improvement. The
projects on the list that are proposed by staff to be SDC eligible are the type of capital
improvements which fall under the definition of improvement fee. ORS 223.304(2)(b)
requires that improvement fees must be calculated to obtain the cost of capital improvements
for the proiected need for available system capacity for future users.
Therefore, the growth allocations on the project list must be the percentages of the cost of the
capital improvements that are needed to provide the capacity needed to serve future growth.
Capacity not needed to serve future growth during the planning period must be paid for by
current residents. If excess capacity is created that exceeds the needs of both current residents
and the growth projected during the planning period, then growth in the following planning
periods can be required to reimburse the extra cost paid by current residents through a
reimbursement fee.
There are also some well established rules that courts have fonnulated over the years. One is
that growth can not be charged SDCs that would establish a higher level of service for growth
than current residents would have. For example, if current residents would have 10.0 acres of
natural area per thousand residents under the plan, growth can not be charged an SDC that
would provide 20.0 acres of natural area for new homebuyers. Another rule is that projected
growth for a specific planning period can only be required to pay for projects that are planned
for that same planning period. Projects planned for a subsequent planning period would be
paid for by the projected growth for that planning period. Both of these rules come into play
with this project list, and that leads into the specific issues we have with the project list.
The percentages of the allocated costs of the project list are inconsistent with the
capacity data and growth allocation percentages provided by staff in spreadsheet Table
A: PROS Project and Priority Plan - Project Acres and Growth Allocation.
The state System Development Charge statute requires that the 309 List contain a list of
projects, as well as the percentage of an improvement fee project cost that is SDC eligible.
The state statute also requires that the percentage of cost be based upon the portion of the
capacity costs ofthe project that is needed to serve growth. The most obvious thing that must
be provided initially, therefore, is the total capacity ofthe project, because without the
capacity data, there is no way to determine what portions of the project costs are needed to
serve future growth. In the case of parks, the capacity ofland acquisition is typically
measured in acres. Capacity of park development projects is typically measured in terms of
park amenities - ball fields, swimming pools, and tennis courts, for example.
I would like to start with an example and follow that example through my discussion to
demonstrate the issues as I elaborate on them. The example I will use is found on the project
2
list under the General/Citywide planning area for New Parks and Open Space. The project is
titled "Acquire additional ridgeline to complete Fern Ridge to West Eugene Wetlands". The
project cost is identified as $10 million. The Growth Allocation share is 35% of the $10
million cost, or $3.5 million. The question, therefore, is what percentage of the project is
needed to provide capacity for growth at the same level of service as the current residents?
We must first determine the total capacity of the project to determine how much of that
capacity is SDC eligible. Staff has provided two supplemental spreadsheets. The first is
entitled "Table 2 Allocation of Project List Acreage / Cost". The second is entitled "Table A:
PROS Project and Priority Plan - Project Acres". (Both spreadsheets are attached.)
The first spreadsheet provided to the council, Table 2, indicates the acreages of park
categories. For example, it says that the project list acreage of Natural Area Parks is 1,490.5
acres. Frankly, however, that is not true, at least according to Table A. Table A says that the
total proposed acquisition for Natural Areas is 2,821.7 acres - a substantial difference of
1,331.3 acres. Looking specifically at our Fern Ridge example, the project cost of$1O million
is to acquire a total of 1,000 acres. However, Table A goes on to indicate that 750 of the
1,000 acres would be "partner funded", that "Acquisition Acres Net of Partner Funded" are
250 acres, and that Growth Share is 35% of the 250 acres at a cost of$865,984.
We can assume, therefore, that it is staffs position that only 250 of the 1,000 acres ofthe
project would be acquired by the city and qualify as an SDC improvement project and that
35% of the 250 acres represents the capacity needed to serve growth. That means that
growth's share of the $10 million project cost is not 35% ($3.5 million) but rather 8.7%
($865,984). This problem exists with all of the acquisition projects that are partially "partner
funded". The growth allocation on the project list council is being asked to adopt is for the
entire project cost, even though Table A indicates that many ofthe projects are not to be fully
acquired by the city.
The "Partner Funded" issue raises another question. What happens if the partner funding falls
through? Let's look again at the Fern Ridge example. Staff indicates that 750 acres will be
purchased by a funding partner and 250 acres will be acquired by the city. Let's now assume
that the funding partner does not materialize. There are then three possibilities. First, the city
could be content with 250 acres and charge growth for 35% of that acquisition. That scenario
(although not necessarily the growth percentage) is fine. The second possibility is that the
city will not go forward with the project at all. That raises some issues, because the city will
have collected SDCs for a project that doesn't happen. However, if the project review period
is short enough, that is manageable, because the SDC funds can be diverted to future projects
and reduce the future need for SDC increases. It is the third possibility that is problematical.
The city could choose to acquire the entire 1000 acres itself. If so, what is the allocation that
should be assigned to growth? If it remains 35% of 250 acres, current residents would pay
more than their share. If it is 35% of the 1,000 acres, growth pays more than its share. Can
that dilemma be resolved? I believe it can, and I will propose a solution in the next section of
this discussion.
3
However, the initial problem still remains. There is no way to know, based on the project list
that council is being asked to adopt, what the growth capacity actually is. Using natural area
parks again as an example, according to the Priority Plan and Project List, it is simply 35% of
all ofthe projects' total capacity - 35% of2,821.7 acres. So, the project list that council is
being asked to adopt could require growth pay SDCs for the acquisition of 987.6 acres.
However, that would not be consistent with the level of service proposed by staff for natural
area parks. We need to turn again to Table 2.
For all of the park acquisition and development categories, staffhas allocated a percentage of
the capacity to current residents to meet existing deficiencies and then a percentage to growth.
In all but one category, the two capacities add up to 100%, as they should. For example, for
land acquisition for community parks, staff identifies an existing deficiency of 51 % to be paid
for by current residents, while growth is allocated the remaining 49%. For the development
of linear parks, the ratio is 60% to 40%. For acquisition ofland for neighborhood parks, the
ratio is 0% to 100%. However, for natural area parks, the ratio is very different. Through the
20 year planning perio'd, staff recognizes an existing deficiency of32% to be paid by current
residents and growth's allocation is 35% - for a total of 67% rather than 100%. Then
something strange happens. The table allocates the missing 33% (492.4 acres) to growth for
projects to be acquired beyond the planning period. Houston, we have a problem.
Are we to assume that the projected population (both current residents and projected growth)
for this planning period is to pay for all of the 1490.5 acres of natural area, with current
residents paying 32% of the cost and growth paying 68%, even though 492.4 acres would be
acquired outside this planning period? That won't fly. The growth allocation can only be
applied to projects to be acquired or developed within this planning period. Projects to be
acquired or developed during subsequent planning periods are allocated to the projected
population of that subsequent planning period.
If staff is proposing, as it appears they are, that the projected population of this planning
period pay for not only the natural areas to be acquired during this planning period but also
492.4 acres to be acquired during the following planning period, then they are also proposing
that the projected growth of this planning period not pay for 35% ofthe 1490.5 acres; they are
really proposing that growth pay for 68% of the acres acquired by the city for natural areas - a
total of 1013.54 acres. Wow! Growth was better off paying 35% of all of natural acres on the
project list even though many of those acres (1331.3 acres) are to be owned by agencies other
than the city (according to the staff memo dated April 4, 2006). After all, 35% of the total
2,821.7 total natural area acres shown on Table A only totals 987.6 acres compared to the
1013.54 acres that staffis apparently proposing growth should pay for.
The staff memo dated April 4, 2006, says: "A clarification is that acres considered in the
growth allocation percentages include only city-owned parks and facilities; acres in Tables 1
and 2 ofthe March 6 memo are net of other agency-owned acres". That makes perfectly good
sense because Eugene can not collect SDCs from city residents for other agencies. That
brings us back to the 1490.5 acres that staff has identified as being acres that will be city-
owned.
4
Again, we return to the same question that I raised earlier: How do we reconcile the huge
inconsistency between the growth allocations on the project list and the growth allocations
staff provides in Table A? The project list that the council is asked to adopt allocates a
blanket 35% of the natural area projects to growth. However, as staffhas pointed out in its
memo, almost half of the projects' capacity will not be owned by the city and the city cannot
collect SDCs for those acres that are owned by other agencies. On the other hand, according
to Table 2, staff is proposing that the growth projected for this planning period actually pay
for 68% ofthe capacity ofthe city-owned portion of the natural area projects. That is a far-
cry from the 35% noted on the project list.
An actual allocation of 68% of the 1,490.5 acres of natural area capacity to projected growth
is not supported by the numbers. Both PROS and the Priority Plan assume a current
population for Eugene of 160,469 persons and a total projected population for Eugene at the
end of the planning period of 21 0,900 residents. That means that 50,431 new residents will be
accommodated in new housing that is SDC eligible (existing households that are annexed into
the city would not pay SDCs). That projected growth will comprise 24% of the total
projected population for this planning period.
Table B-1 of PROS indicates that the current inventory of natural area totals 1,486.77 acres
for an existing level of service for current residents of9.27 acres per 1000 residents. For
purposes of growth allocation, staff identifies an existing deficiency of 481.8 acres for current
residents (Table 2). Adding the 481.8 acres to the existing 1,486.77 acres would provide the
current 160,469 residents with 1,968.57 acres and a level of service of 12.27 acres per
thousand. By comparison, the 50,431 person making up future growth would purchase a total
of 1008.7 natural area acres for a level of service of 20 acres per thousand. In other words,
future residents would be required to pay for a substantially higher level of service than
existing residents and I think everyone recognizes that that is not permitted under SDC law.
The 100% allocation to growth for the acquisition of neighborhood parks is not
consistent with the actual capacity costs needed to serve growth.
State law requires that the 309 list identify the portion of the project costs needed to serve
growth and that cost share must be based upon the portion of the project capacity needed to
serve growth. The 309 list indicates that 100% of the neighborhood park acquisition projects
costs are needed to serve growth, and, therefore, 100% of the capacity of each of those
neighborhood parks is needed to serve growth. Conversely, that means that none ofthe
capacity of any of the proposed neighborhood park acquisitions is needed to serve existing
residents. However, a simple examination of the proposed acquisitions shows that to be
untrue. LCOG provided the HBA with two maps (one covering north Eugene and the other
south Eugene) that identifies the remaining vacant residential lands in the Eugene UGB. I
have drawn upon that map the circles that correspond to each of the proposed neighborhood
park acquisitions on the 309 list (for example, B-3, R-I, W-II). These maps will be
submitted into the record. These specific park acquisition locations are identified on the
PROS map entitled Eugene Park Service Areas, School Service Areas, and Unserved
Residential Areas. It is very clear that the proposed citywide acquisitions would principally
5
be in existing neighborhoods for the benefit of current residents. Just eyeballing the
acquisitions, I would guess that 70% ofthe projects' capacity would serve existing residents
and 30% would serve growth. How then does staff then justifY the 100% allocation of the
neighborhood acquisitions to growth?
Staff opted to use a level of service that is slightly less than the present level of service for
existing residents. Staff then assumes in Table 2 that there is no existing deficiency of
neighborhood park land for existing residents. What is the basis for that, particularly in light
of the needs assessment in PROS that identifies an existing deficiency of neighborhood park
land for existing residents at 64.17 acres?
The first thing to note is that the level of services that staff and the consultant choose to use
for the various park categories is very arbitrary. The table below demonstrates that.
*Calculation of LOS for the project list assumes the acquisition of the 1,490.5 acres
recommended by staff in Table A rather than the total project acreages of2,821.7 of the
project list. If the total acreages ofthe natural area projects plus existing natural areas were
assumed to serve Eugene residents, the LOS would be 20.4 acres / thousand residents.
Park Type Current Project List Proposed
LOS LOS LOS in
PROS
Neighborhood Parks 1.3 1.26 1.7
Community Parks 1.37 1.80 1.5
Natural Areas * 9.27 14.10 10.0
The important thing to remember is that there is nothing inherently correct about what level of
service staff opts to use, because the project list itself offers a large array of choices. The
asterisk above demonstrates that. There is also nothing inherently correct in determining the
amount of existing deficiencies, because the determination of the existing deficiency is
dependent upon the LOS selected. Staffs determination of existing deficiencies again differs
widely from those identified in PROS:
Current Deficiencies by Park T
Park T e
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
Natural Areas
e in Acres
PROS
64.17
21.53
117.92
Table 2
o
82.4
481.8
Staff claims that the existing deficiency identified in PROS is irrelevant. On the contrary, it is
very relevant. It is the recognition by the community, and the council when it adopted PROS,
that current residents are underserved with neighborhood parks. That is what an existing
deficiency is, and what a simple level of service approach can fail to recognize. Staff also
feels the fact that the land acquisitions would be located in existing neighborhoods is
irrelevant. No, it's highly relevant. It is also a recognition that current residents are
6
underserved with neighborhood parks and that the level of service to existing residents will
thereby be increased by these proposed acquisitions.
Staff's position is: "A system-wide analysis and the simplifying assumption that capacity
needs of the existing population are first met by the existing parks inventory avoids the
complexity of an overly detailed and speculative analysis of the exact location of individual
park and park service areas in relation to the exact location of, and resulting population
related to, individual developments".
There are two problems with staffs position: (1) It is not enough that the needs ofthe
existing population are first met by the existing park inventory in order to determine there is
not existing deficiency. Rather the needs of the existing population must be completely met
by the existing park inventory. There is nothing is the staff's data or analysis that suggests
that is in fact the case, and PROS argues strongly to the contrary. (2) Staff says they prefer
this simplified approach to an overly detailed and speculative analysis of the exact location of
individual parks. What staff is ignoring is that with respect to neighborhood parks, the
acquisition locations of the projects on the project list are not speculative, but are in fact very
specific. Everyone of the acquisitions is identified by a specific neighborhood planning area
(Bethel, Willakenzie, etc.) and then additionally by a specific location within that planning
area (B-3, R-2, W-II, etc.). Compared to the complexity ofthe growth allocation analysis for
natural areas, the analysis for neighborhood parks is actually a cakewalk.
The simplicity that staff wants really comes down to a fundamental question. Are all current
residents of Eugene now adequately served with neighborhood park land? If the council
believes the answer to that question is no, then the councilors also believe that there is an
existing deficiency of neighborhood parks. In that case, growth can not be required to pay for
100% of the proposed neighborhood park capacity. Because the proposed neighborhood park
acquisitions are principally proposed for existing neighborhoods, either there is an intent to
cure an existing deficiency or there is an intent to raise the level of service for existing
residents. It has to be one or the other and growth can not be charged for either one.
We do not have a problem with a citywide approach to the other park categories. Current and
new residents are expected to travel some distances to access a community park such as
Amazon or the Ridgeline Trails. However, neighborhoods parks by their definition and
function do not serve a citywide constituency. They are designed to serve the residents in the
immediate vicinity only, and if the proposed neighborhood park acquisitions are located in
existing neighborhoods, the capacity of those projects is to serve principally current residents.
The Home Builders Association would like to propose a solution that we believe would
be fair to current residents as well as future growth. It would also make the entire
allocation process a lot simpler to understand.
We suggest that the growth allocation be based upon the needs assessment summarized in
Table B-1 of PROS. Staff has told you that PROS is irrelevant but it really shouldn't he. As
staffhas consistently pointed out when discussing PROS, it is the result of a great deal of
community input. An advisory committee met for two-and-a-half years to review the current
7
park inventory and analyze the community's future park needs for exactly the same planning
period that the project list covers. The public involvement that resulted in the project list also
produced PROS. On the other hand, the growth allocation analysis and the determinations of
existing deficiencies proposed by staff was developed only by staff and the city's consultant.
Even the Rates Committee did not deliberate as a committee to develop of the growth
allocation numbers. They were given an explanation of the numbers by staff, but the
committee did not help formulate them.
Once the project list was removed from PROS, virtually the only remaining part of PROS
with any substance is the needs analysis. Staff is now asking that you ignore that as well.
The ink is barely dry on the Mayor's signature on the PROS resolution and staffis already
telling you to put it on the shelf and let it gather dust because the information in it has little or
no value. You have another option and that is to value the needs assessment that the
community developed and that you adopted.
If you use that needs assessment, the growth capacity actually becomes relatively easy. It
would look like this:
LAND ACQUISITION
Neighborhood park acquisition would be allocated 43% to current residents and 57% to
growth.
Community parks would be allocated 22% to current residents and 78% to growth for the first
97.18 acres and any additional acres would be allocated on a ratio of76% to current
residents and 24% to growth.
Natural areas would be allocated 19% to current residents and 81 % to growth for the first 622
acres and any additional acres would be allocated 76% to current residents and 24% to
growth.
The allocations proposed by staff for urban plazas, metropolitan parks, linear parks, and
special facilities are acceptable to us as long as there is not a substantial change in the amount
of acreage involved for any of the categories. It is a comparatively simple matter to then
calculate growth's share of the project costs and apply the percentage to the project list.
As noted above, the growth allocation would change for community parks and natural areas
after an initial amount of acres had been purchased. For example, according to the needs
assessment for natural areas, it was determined that the community needs to acquire 622 more
acres of natural area during this planning period to achieve the level of service for current
residents and future growth that the community felt was desirable - 10.0 acres per thousand
residents. If 19% of those 622 acres is purchased by current residents and 81 % of the 622
acres is purchased by growth, the completed acquisition of 622 acres means that everyone -
current residents and projected growth - will have purchased the amount of acreage to place
them at the same level of service - 10.0 acres per thousand residents. Any acres purchased in
addition to the 622 acres should then be allocated based on the ratio of current residents as
part ofthe total population versus projected growth as part ofthe total population -76% to
8
24%. (Current residents comprise 160,469 persons of the projected 210,900 total population
and growth would constitute the remaining 50,431 persons.)
The acquisition portion by current residents would have to be actual acquisition by existing
residents through bonds measures, etc. For example, grants or other funding from outside
sources could not be used to reduce the cost to current residents without doing so for growth
as well.
If the allocations we propose are used, we will not argue against the use of SDCs for projects
outside the UGB. We will ignore that fact that undoubtedly much less that 57% of the
neighborhood park acquisition is benefiting growth and much more than 43% of the
neighborhood park acquisition is actually benefiting current residents.
PARK DEVELOPMENT
We have a couple of issues relating to park development. Again, it is a comparison of the
level of service found in PROS versus Table 2.
The PROS inventory determined that we currently have 219.17 acres of community parks. Of
that total, 24% is set aside as natural areas. This is in addition to park land identified in the
PROS and the project list as natural areas. Neighborhood parks has a higher ratio - 35%
(73.23 acres) ofthe current 208.63 acres of neighborhood parks is set aside as natural areas.
Despite the considerable amount of acreage in our neighborhood parks and community parks
that is set aside as natural areas, the proposed project list assumes that every acre of all
neighborhood and community parks designated for development on the project list will be
fully developed. Staffs position in their April 4 memo is that "It is impossible to identify the
portions of future parks that might be designated as natural areas until specific sites are
acquired and park design is complete". However, the development costs are higher because
there is no consideration of the fact that some portion of the neighborhood and community
parks will not be developed. It would seem reasonable to use the same ratios as our current
parks, because the trend is toward more open space rather than less.
Ifwe assumed, therefore, that each of the neighborhood parks would be comprised of35%
natural area, neighborhood park WI 1 would have 2.6 developed acres rather than 4 developed
acres, which would in turn reduce the development costs on the project list. The same
analysis would apply to community parks. We also have the same issue with the development
of the neighborhood parks that we had with the land acquisition. Virtually all ofthe parks
being developed are to serve fully-developed or almost fully-developed neighborhoods.
There are only two neighborhood parks (WCI and WC3) being proposed in areas that are
perhaps 50% undeveloped, and that is presumably because the those two neighborhood parks
include additional acreage for "gateways" to the Ridgeline Trail. Neither of those parks are
scheduled for development during this 20 year planning period. Yet, growth, which will
constitute only 24% of the population at the end of the planning period and which will receive
very little capacity benefit from the developed neighborhood parks, is being asked to pick up
49% ofthe bill. That is because Table 2 assumes that there is only an existing deficiency of
9
36.5 acres of developed neighborhood parks. Table C-2 of PROS identifies an existing
deficiency of 45.28 acres of developed parkland for our current neighborhood parks. For
example, it proposes that 3.09 acres of Chase Commons' 4.09 acres be developed. That 45.28
acre deficiency of developed neighborhood park would be in addition to the portion of the
64.17 acres ofland that should be acquired to serve existing residents in PROS. If we assume
that 65% of those acres would be developed, there is a total deficiency of developed
neighborhood parks of 88.27 acres - 17 more acres than would be developed in the project
list. Given that, it is difficult to understand why growth would be allocated 49% of the cost of
developing neighborhood parks.
The proposed park developments are almost exclusively in established neighborhoods that
have little capacity for additional growth. We suggest that growth's share of the development
costs be the same as the ratio of current residents to growth in the projected population -76%
to 24% - with the growth allocation set at 24% instead of 49%.
PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Neighborhood parks is the only category in PROS in which the identified need in Table B-1 is
not met. The community park projects are reasonably comparable to the level of service in
PROS. Natural areas in the project list, however, far exceed the proposed level of service in
PROS. The often expressed desire during the PROS process was a balance ofthe various
park types. The project list puts that balance out of kilter by not including all of the
neighborhood parks that will be needed over the next 20 years. As the little remaining
buildable land is developed, those areas will not be served with neighborhood parks if this
project list is implemented. It would be a shame that the type of park that is often most
requested by neighborhoods is the one that is shorted on the project list.
I hope that the council was able to follow my analysis of the level of services and existing
deficiencies. I thank you in advance for your consideration of our solution to the growth
allocations.
Sincerely,
/~ 7
l~><u- ~c--
i ,.
Roxie Cuellar
Director of Government Affairs
10
0 0 t') - t') ~
uO!JOlndod ~ 0. ClO C"l t') r--
- ..0
0 SZOZ papa/OJd ~ 0: ,...: N 0: ..0 -
w "'" 0. C"l '<l ~ t').
W - '<l o:l
Z -
I- 0- N 0
w r-- t') C"l C"l
Z -0. 0. '<l ClO o:r
uO!JOlnclod JualJo:) d - ~
'<i ,...: <"i ..; ,...:
-0 - .... 0 0 0
- '<l N .... C"l - t')
(UOllDl'ldod OOO'l JOd sa,,,v) ~ ~ 0 C"l ClO 0
d ..; d
SpJOpUDJS pasodoJd - .... .... .... ..0 C"l
0 0 0 ~o 0 0 0 0 0 ~g
0 0 0 (\)0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0
q q q o.~ q q q q ~o a.q
- - - - - - -
(UClgO\lldod JOd SeJ"V)
pe~!AJes '0 leAal 6U!JS!X3 0 t-.. t-.. t') Ci OJ ll) - It) <0
0: 0
~ ~ N q "! <0 - cO
- - 0- - d ":J" - d ..0
.... -
~
<( t-.. r-- \0 '<l
0 (V) t-.. t-.. It) C') - 0. 0:
-0 - -<i '<i 0 ~ - t-.. <'?
w saJo'v'loIO! a:i 0- d ,...: 0
z CO - --: ":J" Ci
.w 0 - "t ~ - LO (V) ClO 0.
(!) N N -0 N - 0. N
- -
::l
w
S)!JOd 6u\JS!X3 0 0 t-.. r-- C') (V) <'? 0
ll) - N ClO - -0 - N "'" l")
-
laOJ01 UOld euaon3 6961 ~ ~ 0 0 OJ 0 0 -
-- -- N -- -- cO
- c c c c
"SPJOpuoIS 0 -2 0 0 -2 0
U) N co -- ? -- -
.... Vd~N O!-loJS!H c c c c
0
0
I-
z qSPJOPUOIS <") C") D- o 0 ":J" C') C"l
co ~
0 --: ~ -- ? - --q
eOOJaA V u06aJO - ":J" C d N
U) - - C')
~
<(
ll.
:2 oSI~!JIS!a -0
0 ll) N - o. - 0 t-.. -
U jse!l!:) elqoJOdwo:) --q t-.. co -- t-.. q N 0:
- - -<i c ('") - ":J"
JOJ SpJopuoJS eooHMV -
VI VI
~ ~
0 VI ~
tn ~
a.. ~ 0 .0
0 0 -0
'U a.. a.. 0
0 a.. 0 VI u.. c:
0 c: ~
~ oj) 0 g ~ oj)
CIl .c ~ N 0 VI
0 c: 0 :::> 0
a. :J :2 c:.: "6
>- .D a. ll. :g ll.
E 0
..... .c :5 0 c: e 0 @ -'
.:,:: 01 E :0 0 0 <(
0 .(jj 0 "0 .D Qi oj) CIl .c ......
::J :5 c: a. D 0
a.. Z U Z V) Z ::; U) ...... <
"0
(])
(])
Z
"0
(])
-
o
0.
'0
+=
c
<t:
"0
C
o
U)
"0
~
o
"0
C
o
-
en
(])
o
o
0.
en
c
(])
0.
o
~
..::::::.
....
o
0...
.....
I
ro
Q.)
:0
o
.....
..
:0
.!!
.ijj
>-
~
"0
c
"
:;;
~
..
"
3
0>
u:
u
-.::
..
o
c
.2
;;
..
t;
..
'"
'"
..
.x
io
n.
0>
c
..
;;
E
.!!
~
."
C
~
~
is
.2
;;
~
0::
.,
..
.x
iii
"-
..
I
EO
;;
"iii
::>
l-
~
~
0.
0-
W
;;
"iii
en
.,,-
c
..
(;
n.
~
a;
~
0.
C)
i
."
:;
0.
'"
~
.0
'"
.. 0
-g ~
~ ~ c.
~ & ~
"0 ~ ~
~B .g
~~ ]
4;;.:;: C)
G.~ g:
.! g ~
.g 8: <(
tv rt i3
fr ~ g
:3 ~ LC
vi
'"
-.::
o
0>
'"
~
<0
.!;
.,
'"
13
c
'"
0>
..
ro
E
g
'"
:0
.!!!
-OJ
>
.,
o
c
'"
;;;
;.
.,
'"
'5
Ol
G:
cO
-9
a;
R
a
0-
o
o
o.
oi
""
io
""
c
..
Wi
a;
.~
~
::>
c
..
..
...
~
..
..
""
c
..
:x
..
0.
'0
c
~
:@
..
'ii
:;;
"tI
..
'"' c
.2 0.
u
;; .2
-", :;
'" 0- 1:
.!; 0.
;; 0- 5
." a
S 0 I
Cl ".
"l'! '= ..
..
iii 0>
.. U j
1: '" io
CD EO n.
." "tI
C "0
.. :: 0.
in 0.
'" e .c
u 0. B
.. >< -"
0. '" .c
(/) ~ 0>
C 0. ~
'" g-
o. >-
0 ... "iii
)! u ~
iij U
.x .. li:
ro <D .
ll. ;!
'" "
.2 ..
;;; ~ ~
<D .. :0
tJ E <l
<D "
f" ~ c
'"
'" .
~ 0 .
"C 5
< ~ ~
"-
'" '"
Z D
., -
co if ~
c
C C ~
.-
'"
b
'"
-0
~
.,
~
'"
'"
a;
'"
'"
5
0>
G:
--'
~
a.
-0
c
.,
'"
en
'"
:ii
~
Qj
.D
-0
..
>-
'"
<:
iil
.,
~
.0
\II '1 35..
A
;fl. ;fl. ~ ~ ~ ~ ;fl. ~ ~ ~ ;fl. ;fl. ~ ;fl. ;fl. ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 C") 0 0 0> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
it) C") C\l
N ~
0 0
C\l
"'0
c:
~
e '<t: ~
~ CI) C\l N
0> 0>
00 ~ ~
e e
(!) ;;.
~ ;fl. ;fl. ~ ~ <f? <f? ;fl. ;fl. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
it) 0 lO 0> 0 lO 0 0 0> 0> 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 <0
0 C") ~ 0 C") 0 0 C") ~ I"- 0 ~ 0 <0
C\l ~ .... .... .... .... .... ....
0 0
N
2
.I::.
~
.I::. CI) 0 <C! .... ~ C") 0 C") lO I"- q <C! I{) q C'! q 0
~ ari 0 0> <D c<) 0 ari ~ 0 .... ..0 0 C") C\l r--:
e 00 I{) I"- .... .... <0 ~ C\l 0
(!) e I{) <0 ....
0
<(
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <f? <f? <f? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 I{) .... 0 C\l 0 0 C") .... 0 <0 0 0 0 0 ~
<0 lO C") .C") I{) C\l <0 C")
{)' ~
c: 0
CI)
"(5
I;:::
CI)
0
Cl q ~ oq C\l LO co co ....
c: CI) N .... ..0 <D ..j- ..j- <D
:p co co <0 C") .... I{)
!Il 00 ~ I{)
"x e
w 0
<(
~CI) 0 <C! ~ ~ I{) 0 C") .... C'! q ~ I{) q 0 0 ....
ari .... .... 0 c<) 0 c<) .... 0 <D u1 0 cO N c<)
..J lO <0 0> C\l l"- I{) C\l <0
'000 .... '<t:. ~ ....
Cl)e .... ....
"~O
e<(
0-
~
0
.... .~
.!!! en 0
-./ (/) en en 0
::x: (/) ::x: en ......
.... a::: ::x: ::x: a::: ::x: ::x: ~
0 0:: 0::
.C>> <( (/) 0:: (/) <( (/) a::: (/)
0- c 0- ::x: <( <( W 0- ::x: <( <( w 1
0:: a.. a.. F 0:: 0. a.. F
It 0 0 0
;;:; 0 it z ~ ::i 0 <( z ~ (/) :J
........ u; 0 (/) ~ ~ (3 - 0 (/) a.. ~ ::x: U
o~ ::x: 0:: c ::x: ~ 0::
,=0 ":; :r: a::: ~ ..J <( a::: <( C>> :r: a::: ::::i <( a::: <(
c:r a::: it 0 <( U. !Il E a::: <( 0 <( u.. !Il fa
N~~ CI) 0 Z ..J 0. e 0 z ..J a.. e
~ 0- ~ ..J a. a.. 0. ~ ..J ......
(Q z ::> 0 a::: <( 0 0 (Q z ::> 0 a::: <( ;j ~
..! ~ III 1-" :r: <( :2 a::: ::> ~ (3 <( 'ii :r: <( ~ a::: ::> ~ U .....
0
.a 0 e ~ c (!) (Q ~ tu ~ w ~ > (!) m :2 I- ~ w 19 Cl)
cu:::::o 00 lU iIi a::: 0 Z a.. CD iIi a::: 0 w z a.. 0 "[
I- q; q: 0....1 Z ::> 0 ::JE Z ::::i (/) l- e z ::> 0 :2 Z ..J (/) I- ~
ri:-)
~ '-l.~
~
".c
c--
E~:g
='-0
eo
D..
~
".c..
~~:.
._ e.c
"Giolll
~
b _G; ~~
u"i~z ;!ji-a
-t;O':.!o>c;c
Q."ij L. lit 0.. 0 ::I
~"'D..8 ;0 LL
0::
-ace
.. 0 ..
ii'lGE&.1ii
oE.!!loo
...:;; &l 0
w.:i~
, ~ 'C
.!!!c<o..
;'.2 e -.e -g
~%:~~~~
~ ~::
_'C~
~ C U
~~-<
llg=
8" :w .9
-<-~
g._ In
'ii ; !
~E~
c
III
G)
...
~
....
(,)
,~
E
a.
~
c
..
::J
o
J!l
'2
::>
C
l'll
ii:
1:
";:
o
';:
a.
'tJ
c
l'll
....
(,)
,~
o
...
a.
tJ>
o
0:::
a.
<i.
G)
::s
l'll
I-
~i
lfe
<-'
0/5
III
l!!
~
...
u
Q)
'0' c
... 0
o..~
. m
c u
m.2
n:<
~
';:
o
';:
0..
'C
C
.. m
<(tl
Q) Q)
:g-[
1-0..
Q)
u
m
Q.
III
C
~
o
'C
c
m
~
...
m
Q.
~
Q)
c
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
~
o
o
o
~
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
....
....
o
....
U>
~
o
'"
'"
~
'"
~
'"
U>
;S
~
Gl
U>
.9
.s
'(ij
~
CIl
C.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
Ol
'ijj
C
'"
~
'5
C"
o
<
ro
~
CIl
~
CIl
U>
;S
~
Gl
U>
.B
Gl
-'"
U>
~
CIl
c.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
Cl
'ijj
C
'"
~
'5
ff
<
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
....
*-
o
$!
*-
o
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
....
000
000
000
ci o~ 0
o co 0
It') .... It')
.... ....
.... 0 ....
....
000
....
e
o
CIl
U> U>
~ ~
o 0
'" '"
i;-
f!
~
'2
::>
s:
c.
o
~
Gl
"
Gl
0::
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
*-
o
$!
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
....
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
*-
o
$!
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
It') It')
.... ....
.... ....
.... .... ....
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
*-
o
o
~
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
~
o
o
$!
o
o
o
a
~
....
o
o
o
a
~
....
....
o
o
o
a
co
....
....
o
o
o
a
co
....
....
o
o 0 0 ~ ,...
....
.q """ ....,. ....,. ,...
co
~
'"
e
CIl
U>
~
~
Gl
U>
.B
~
'"
c.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
Cl
'ijj
c
e
'5
ff
<
U>
e
o
CIl
-
~
Gl
""
'"
~
CIl
C.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
Cl
'ijj
C
CIl
e
'5
ff
<
'"
e
o
'"
g
~
'"
~
'"
c.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
Cl
'Qj
c
e
'5
C"
o
<
'"
e
o
CIl
~
0::
"
c
'"
'"
~
Gl
""
'"
~
CIl
C.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
Cl
'ijj
C
'"
~
'5
C"
o
<
III
.'"
1Il
~
CIl
ll.
Gl
ii
"
E
Gl
u..
C.
o
Q3
:>
Gl
o
'"
'3,
<'i
'"
'"
....
co
co
....
g
....
~
0>
....
*-
0>
....
o
o
o
a
'"
;;;
o
o
o
a
'"
;;;
o
e
o
CIl
Gl
.6
Q3
Cl
"
0::
"
c
'"
~ ~
CIl '"
C. C.
" "
o 0
o 0
-E -E
o 0
.c .c
.c .c
Cl Cl
'in "Q5
c c
'" "
: ~
(,) :0
~ E
CIl 8-
lS 00
~ :;;~
0:: ~ '>,
g. e ~
~ 'S.!!
t3 ~~
o
o
It')
,.:
'"
0>
....
*-
o
$!
o
o
It')
,.:
'"
0>
...
o
o
o
a
It')
"t
;;;
It')
,...:
o
It')
N
$!
o
o
~
'"
~
o
'"
o
o
It')
,.:
'"
0>
...
*-
o
$!
o
o
It')
,.:
'"
0>
....
o
o
o
a
It')
"t
;;;
It')
,...:
~ '
N
$!
o
o
o
o
a
o
It')
...
*-
o
$!
o
o
o
a
o
It')
...
o
o
o
a
o
It')
...
....
....
0>
It')
....
.,.;
....
;;;
*-
0>
....
o
o
o
a
co
'"
....
o 0
o 0
o 0
o~ 0
co ....
'" '"
.... ....
o 0
~
m
....
o
o
o
a
....
'"
....
'"
....
0>
~
;;:;
o ('I') N C\I 0
o
~
....,. ('I") N C\I ...,.
Gl
,6
Q3
Cl
"
0::
"
c
'"
~
CIl
c. ro
" <.>
g ~
-g ~
.c '"
-g, c.
'as "0
c g
a: -E
c 0
:0 ~
a .~
0- c
58 .e
:;;~ "g
~ 'iu .!1!
e ~ e
'5~ '5
C"CIl C"
~~ ~
'"
~
o
'"
'" '"
~ e
o 0
'" CIl
~
~
~
'"
c.
"
o
o
-E
o
.0
.c
Cl
'ijj
c
'"
U>
CIl
J!l
.c
Cl
'ijj
J:
U>
c
:l2
~
'"
J:
c.
o
~
Gl
o
ro
<.>
~
~
'"
c.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
0>
'ijj
C
C.
o
~
..
o
'" U>
e e
o 0
'" '"
co
o
3:
~
Gl
'"
.B
~
'"
ll.
~
Gl
"
:>
c.
o
Q3
:>
Gl
o
'"
....
0>
cO
;;:;
o
o
o
a
o
It')
...
~
o
0>
....
~
o
o
o
o
o
o
....
'"
...
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
o
o
o
~
...
o
o
o
a
o
It')
...
o
....
....
'"
~
o
'"
'"
~
'"
:>.
'"
a.
.c
'~
-i
'"
c.
"
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c
~ .~
~ '"
CIl '"
c. .s
'8 "ij)
o
-E
o
.0
.c
Cl
'ijj
c
~
.2
"
c
.!1!
~
'5
8"
<
'"
'"
....
N
0>
'"
...
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
*-
0>
....
*-
o
o
o
o
o
a
o
co
...
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
o
o
a
o
co
....
o
o
o
a
o
It')
....
o
....
....
It')
o
It')
....
'"
e
o
'"
'"
~
o
'"
"0
o
.c
o
'"
<D
'N
c
~
.!1!",
=-0
~~
Ocll
Q3.c
:>"
<Dc
Ocll
C
Gl
"
"0
"
.B
'E
<D
o
'"
'0
'"
.c
1::
o
c
.B
III
~ S
~ 'iij
cIl ~
C. '"
" c.
o "
o 0
-E 0
o -E
.0 0
.c .c
.~~ -a
c co om
",- c
.~ ~ g-
&~ l
:i." t3
'"
....
0>
<'i
'"
'"
...
~
m
....
o
o
o
a
co
....
...
o
o
o
a
~
...
o
(")
III
Cl
cIl
a.
o
E
III
~
....
....
'"
~
o
'"
'"
~
co
o
o
N
<<i
'E
a.
<(
/')
i3
c:-
".t:
c--
-~..
~e8
eel
a..
c:-
".t: ..
~~:o
_...t:
~(!)(fJ
a..
I _ C g
b" - 4J .2 erG "'- W 0
.UCD~Z CiJ!!." 0
ca1l0'l!o> c:5 5 ~
It'! t:g 2 ~ 0 u. .,.
() () ~
-oCC
-s:8e_
'5E!!g-~
t-;: &_0
an~~
c
. .. 'C
-5g!~!~
C".-u.~c
~:=<(z~.r
! ~ =
1::'C"
:~~
t8~
u.. u
0(-<
~c ::
~e~
c
&:>
~
..
::J
a
J!l
'2
::l
U),c
~~
1l.E!
(!)
0/.1
Ul
l!!
~
-
(.)
4)
.0' ~
.. 0
Il.;
. ell
IL~
ii:<(
b
.;:
o
.;:
Il.
"C
~
.. ell
<t)
4)4)
:g'e-
.-Il.
o
o
o
ci
o
N
.,.
o
N
N
'"
~
"
'"
....
....
....
,..:
m
.,.
~
m
....
000
000
000
o cD c:i
co .... ~
.... N
.,. .,.
o 0
o 0
o 0
ci <Ii
co ....
.... N
.,. .,.
o 0
....
....
CD
'3,
o?
0')
N
.,.
m
i'O
;i
Z;;
CD
'3,
o?
0')
N
.,.
~
m
....
o
o
o
ci
co
....
.,.
o
....
....
(J) U) II) l/)
~ ~ ~ ~
(.) (.) (.) ()
ca ca <tl co
;;t
~
.Sl
"0;
-c
III
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.c
.c.
0>
"a;
C
0.
o
~
'"
o
iO
~
'"
'"
'"
-c
III
0.
"0
o
o
-E
.8
.c.
0>
"a;
C
0.
o
l
c
~
m
....
~
o
m
....
0')
N
0')
N
~
.Sl
"0;
-c
III
0.
"0
o
o
-E
.8
.c.
0>
"a;
C
0.
o
~
'"
o
<0
~
.$
"0;
-c
'"
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.0
.s::
0>
"a;
C
0.
o
~
'"
o
N
m
"':.
i'O
N
.,.
~
m
....
o
o
o
cD
i'O
.,.
o
o
o
cD
i'O
.,.
o
0')
..;
0')
..;
~
III
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.0
.s::
Ol
"a;
c
'"
I1l
~
'"
a..
III
"0
C
:::;
(g
~
0.
o
~
Q)
o
....
m
o
~
N
.,.
~
0,
....
o
o
o
as
CD
....
.,.
o
o
o
as
CD
....
.,.
o
a>
o?
a>
o?
'"
~
"
III
'"
"0
Q;
0=
"
l5
::r:
~
..s::
'"
~
~
III
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.c
..s::
0>
"a;
C
'"
III
Q)
'"
'"
~
'"
0.
~
III
o
'"
c
o
~
0.
o
1
o
CD
co
....
cD
10
.,.
~
m
....
o
o
o
ci
N
Z;;
o
o
o
ci
N
Z;;
o
'"
~
"
'"
~
III
Co
"0
o
o
-E
o
.0
.s::
Cl
Gi
C
'"
'"
.$
"0;
~
'"
a.
..
~
o
"0
C
Q)
3:
0.
o
~
Ql
o
CD
....
Cl
o?
0')
N
.,.
~
m
....
o
o
o
ci
~
.,.
o
o
o
ci
~
.,.
o
....
....
'"
~
"
'"
N
o
....
06
co
Z;;
~
o
a>
....
o
o
....
ci
co
0')
.,.
o 0
o 0
.... 0
ci o~
co 0
0') It)
.,. .,.
o ....
....
~
o?
~
o?
o
g
ci
o
10
.,.
~
o
~
o 0
o 0
o 0
o. 0
~ !
....
o
....
co
'3,
ri
0')
N
.,.
;f-
~
o
o
o
ci
~
.,.
o
....
....
(J) CI) U) fA
~ ~ ~ ~
(.) (.) 0 U
ca ca ca ca
~
Ql
'"
.s
>.
~
C
'"
~
Cl
c
2
III
E
0(
Cl
C
o
mN'
:gu
:;:;3
'2-
"''''
E"O
'" 3l
iijc
"~~
~o.
~"O
" 0
~ 0
o.-E
~~
>0>
~.~
~
'"
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.0
.s::
0>
"iii
c
'"
III
-c
III
a.
<Il
"0
~
'"
e!
u
0.
o
~
<Il
o
;;t
~
-c
I1l
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.c
.s::
Ol
"iii
c
'"
~
"s
0"
"
<(
~
'"
0.
"0
o
o
-E
o
.0
.s::
Cl
"iii
C
'"
III
'"
C
o
E
E
o
U
Ql
'"
III
.s::
U
0.
o
~
Ql
o
CD
'3,
~
N
.,.
~
a>
....
o
o
o
ci
~
.,.
o
o
o
ci
~
.,.
o
....
....
~
.$
"0;
-c
~
'C
8
-E
.8
.c.
0>
"iii
C
0.
o
~
<Il
o
CD
'3,
ri
0')
N
.,.
~
0,
....
o 0
o 0
o 0
o~ 0
co co
~ ~
o
o
o
ci
co
....
.,.
o
....
....
'" '"
~ l!!
" "
'" III
N
~
.$
"0;
-c
'"
0.
"0
8
-E
o
.c
.s::
Ol
Oiii
c
0.
o
~
Ql
o
CD
'3,
~
N
.,.
;f-
a>
....
o
o
o
ci
co
....
.,.
o
....
....
~
"0
c
III
0')
~
.$
00;
-c
'"
0.
'C
8
-E
o
.c
.s::
Cl
Oiii
C
0.
o
~
Ql
o
N
0')
....
N
a>
N
.,.
~
a>
....
o
o
o
ci
o
CD
.,.
o
o
o
ci
o
CD
.,.
o
It)
It)
'"
l!!
"
III
"0
c "
'" "
'Co;
'" .
Ql=
.s::Ill
=,e
!,!",
-~
.s::'"
]~
",ea
"'l!!
~Ill
~r;
~a.
~_!i
III C
Cl.g
~~
~'i
~Ill
Cl~
, III
<IlC
co
(DR;
.g>l!!
o::~
c...
..2g
~~
00
on
i!
<Ii
co
'"
~
...
;f-
N
....
o
~
06
M
~
...
o
o
"':.
o
o
o
~
...
III
on
on
o
CD
....
o
...
...
o
0')
~
..
.g
'"
"0
C
o
0.
'"
C
'"
"E
III
Cl
C
<Il
'C
(5
~ Cl
~ g>
o :a
.... C
~ ::J
0: g
~ ~
o
8
:c
0:
o
OJ
:c
el
jjj
Z
N
....
....
oj
...
a>
.,.
~
~
o
o
o
ci
o
o
N
.,.
o
o
o
ci
o
o
N
.,.
o
o
o
~
o
o
~
'"
l!!
"
III
e
~-c
+ III
00.
~~
~5
Og. ~
~8
co
'"
...
oj
co
~
~
0,
....
o
o
o
ci
o
o.
Z;;
o
o
o
ci
o
o.
Z;;
"1
~
"1
~
o
"1
~
'"
l!!
"
III
~
'"
0.
~
C
::J
E
E
o
"
..
.g
"E
III
.2:-
J:
Cl
c
o
m
'"
Cl
c
:a
(5
.s::
oS;
~
'"
a.
c
2
III
E
<(
~
os
s-m
<(::J
o
~
as
~
N
.,.
~
0,
....
o
o
o
ci
o
o
06
.,.
o
o
o
ci
o
o
06
.,.
....
'"
Ol
III
a.
o
E
'"
::2
o
....
o
....
o
o
....
'"
l!!
"
III
!'!
'"
(3
III
1:
'"
en
~
Ql
'"
.s
Q)
'"
'"
~
~
~
C
::J
E
E
8
l!!
os
I
<0
o
o
N
..f
-<::
a.
<(
/. -;).
jT)
2:-
lU.c:
c-_
'E ~ l!l
="'0
ECl
II.
2:-
lU.c: CD
.Ei'"
.5 e ~
eClen
II.
h _4) golj
u-g~z~~J!!~~
:l:!'e-~o ~ c~ g
lUEQ.o Cl!OLL
o (.) ~Cl
-oCC
CD 0 CD
--;;E_
co ftI"0Q.W
~~~~8
.. u >
w<(~
.!! 11).... i'D
~5e2c~
ff;e~:!'55
<( Q.LL
! ~:::
1::"'"
~~~
~8f
~E~
,
fc :3
~E~
o
i:'
~
..
:>
o
!!
C
;:)
cn,c
~~
0."
C)
ell
III
!
~
-
(.)
QI
'0' I:
.. 0
0.;
. III
lij~
0:<
b
'1:
o
'1:
0.
"C
I:
.. III
<t)
QI QI
i"e'
1-0.
..
..
'"
ri
III
CD
N
...
?f1.
....
..
o
o
o
ci
o
CD
ri
...
o
o
o
ci
o
CD
ri
...
o
o
....
o
....
..
e
o
..
'"
..,
a;
!E
Cij
.0
..,
~
.c:
g
Cl
c
'6
OJ
<3
.S
-i
..
ll.
.c:-
'2
'"
E
E
o
o
I'!
..
V
l!l
c
..
en
a.
o
~
..
o
c
..
a.
o
..,
c
..
c
"'0
C:j:;
....
..,e
00
-E~
0'"
.oc
.co
.!2>'fj
....
c c
... c
.E8
eal
.. >
oe
<<=,,-
'0 E
<11.-
ll.Cl
c.~
0..,
"2.2
;:)0
o'~
c~
0..
:ea.
8..~
e :>
.~~ M
000.
<(0..
o
....
'"
-<i
N
"t
;;;
~
a,
....
is
o
ci
o
III
N
...
o
o
o
ci
o
III
N
...
o
o
o
ci
~
~
...
o
N
~
....
..
....
o
o
N
~ III
.... ..
~ ci
o
~ 0
o
N
~ III
.... ..
~ ci
..
e
u
..
..
..
::>
o
.c
~
OJ
o
o
c
:c
""
~
..
u
..
0.
..
c
..
0.
o
...I c
<( <II
.... -e
o OJ
.... ~
~ '>
0: e
<( 0.
II. 0
~ ~8
~ .!H
::E ~2
~ 'g.~
o 0..
o <( c
It)
o
..
.n-
'"
..
,..:
...
N
CD
'"
ai
...
....
...
?f1.
III
III
?f1.
III
'"
o
o
o
ci
~
-<i
~
III
..
~
~
...
o
o
III
N
CD
III
...
CD
III
c::i
0)
c::i
..
e
u
..
..
;;;
,..:
'"
...
?f1.
III
'"
g
N
CD"
o
;;;
o
o
o
.n-
N
....
...
III
N
c::i
III
N
c::i
U1: lD It) M
aooN
o 00 0
U) l{) l() M
aeON
.. ....
e e e
u u 0
.. ....
:6
'3'
"-
:c
~
..
c
~
a
.S
..,
..
"-
o
~
..
..,
..
.0
.s
I'!
..
V
~
..
~~
~~
-c 0.
~ ~ -'
~ ~ ~
0. C 0....
1il ..
.s.2 ~
.., ..,
c c
~ S a..
.~.~ ~
c- c- lQ
U 0 It:
<( <( ;:)
~
..
c.
c
..
-e
::>
...
.g
..,
c
.!!!
e_
'S"U)
c-c
U I'!
<(-
;0 1O :;;
<0 <0 ..
~::f ~h N
f;;* i
rf{.~
III III
'" '"
00
III III
.. ..
~- cO
'" ~
... ...
00
00
00
1O~ to
NN
~nt
"''''
'" '"
dci
~~
00
"'0 0
o 0
III 0
,..: 0-
C") 0
~ III
.... ...
"!
....
..
o
o
o
o
ci
III
N
...
~
.
III
C")
?f1.
o
~
III
t:l
on
~
....
...
o
o
o
ci
III
N
...
'"
...
o
...
N
o
~
>-
~
c
..
e
Cl
-"
..
e
o
c
2
..
E
<(
.2
..,
c
.!!!
e
'3
c-
o
<(
III
CD
..
,..:
....
...
?f1.
o
....
o
~
ai
....
....
...
o
o
...
cD
..
....
...
o
..
0)
'"
..
0)
'"
.. ..
e e
U U
.. ..
~
..
"-
...
..
..
:E
..,
c
..
>-
~
c
..
e
C)
..
e
<(
c
o
~
~
..
....,
.2
c
..
C.
C
..
E
..
c.
E
o
...
~
o
....
o
...
o
o
o
ci
o
q
;;;
o
....
0)
'"
....
0)
M
..
e
o
..
E
.g
-"
..
ew
00
cO
0<(
l1l:6
~.~
~~
c ..
-a€
~a
"c
0..-
.....
~g
~e
..2'
~.-
~af
es
2'ie
5i~
E~
....,
-am
E:r
~
cD
0)
...
?f1.
o
....
o
o
o
ci
...
N
...
o
o
o
ci
~
...
o
N
N
..
e
o
..
c
..
ii:
...
.s
..
..
::;
~
..
ll.
...
o
..
..
It:
C
..
E
..
c.
E
o
o
o
g
;;;
~
o
-<i
'"
~
?f1.
o
~
?f1.
o
....
o
o
o
ci
o
z;
o
~
ai
~
...
o
o
o
ci
o
N
...
o
~
'i
....
N
...
~
C")
....
~ ::
o
'"
m
o
....
en
M
N
..
e
U
..
a;
c
r::
..
.c
o
..
Cl
..
r::
.~
..,
'ijl
>
..
l!l
o
It:
Cl
c
o
Cij
~
..
0.
...
..
..
~
e
'3
c-
U
<(
..,
..
0.
o
~
..
..,
.c
""
~
-"
:a
m
:6
~
o
..,
'E
o
o
...
S
~
E
.s
..
~ €
.... 0
~ '5-
~ :s
~ -g .!a
II. .!!! .~
~ e cD
w .~~~
~ :i. [.S
o
...
?f1.
III
'"
o
...
o
o
o
ci
o
CD
...
~
o
o
on
o
'"
o
o
'"
..
e
U
..
en
:\{
:;;
...
?f1.
III
'"
o
o
o
ci
"'
....
...
o
o
o
ci
o
CD
...
III
N
N
o
"'
,..:
o
'"
o
o
'"
..
e
U
..
.c
~
o
r::
..
:6
.s
~
..
"-
e
"-
Cl
c
'6
:>
<3
.S
ai
Cl
..
C
.g
~
'c
Cij
c
o
E
..,
..,
..
e
'3
c-
o
<(
o
...
?f1.
"'
'"
o
...
o
o
o
ci
o
q
Z;
o
III
o
o
c::i
III
o
~
o
o
o
..
e
U
..
:;;
>
0::
..
'N
c
..
~
U
::;
m
~
..
E
~
~
r::
:c
""
~
..
<II
e
..
e
'"
m
r::
.2
..,
r:: ..
.!2g
.~ ~
"'0::
~8
0)
o
CD
M
....
...
?f1.
III
'"
o
o
III
N
N
...
o
o
"'
N
N
...
":
....
U)
CIl
Ol
'"
C.
o
E
CIl
::;
":
....
o
":
....
e
o
'"
..
S
m
..
'0.
..
J1
<3
.s
..
~
o
..
-g
..
..
<II
e
..
e
OJ
m
r::
...
.g
"
r::
.!!!
e
'3
8"
<(
CD
o
o
N
"'<t'
'E
c.
<(
Qs)
~
lUJ::
c- _
.- ~ "'
E 0 0
="""0
:!!o
Q.
~
.~ ~ e
.5 e~
Q'ioU)
6:
. _ C
C"tl-" ooll
'u.~z ~:!;~
cv1i(i'..!!o > c.s c
g.!Q:~ g~o~
o 0 &!
"c:t:
-j!:8~_
~E~g-;g
to- ~ &j (.)
w~~
~c=o~~
ff~ ~.; 5
< <ZQ.u.
i i :::
i~~
Q.u.<
.!!! S =:
g =.9
<-~
~_ &I>>
_ C ..
.. .. ..
~E~
o
~
c
..
:I
a
2
"2
::l
!/)..c:
~3
o..e
C)
06
III
e
~
t)
GI
'0' c
.. 0
o..:c
. III
C <>
1lI.S!
0:<
~
"i:
o
'i:
0..
'tl
C
.. III
<Ct)
GIGI
:0'0'
Ill'"
1-0..
'"
N
CD
t.:
...
...
~
10
O'l
o
o
10
,.:
O'l
~
...
o
o
o
ci
10
10
...
10
.....
~
10
<'!
~
10
10
o
10
10
"'
e
o
ell
"tl
C
ell
J::
ell
0>
u>
n::
.9
u>
ell
Q)
E
~
~
u>
Q)
.S
Qi
0>
"
it:
1)
Q)
c
C
o
o
BE
"'~
lU~
e u>
.. ..
-Q)
~~
1UQ)
Cot:
Q) Q)
.!= E
::> ..
<T=
~~
'"
.....
.....
Ili
N
~
;;;
~
10
O'l
o
o
o
ci
10
N
,.;
...
o
o
o
ci
10
N
,.;
...
10
N
O'l
10
N
O'l
o
10
N
O'l
u>
e
o
ell
~
m
~
o
C
Q)
0-
en
.9
C
~
C
::>
o
:::;
C
o
o
:::;
*
C.
E
o
o
.9
u>
ell
e
ell
e
::>
10
C_
Q) C
'S ~
<To>
~~
...
co
'"
Ili
CD
co
...
~
10
O'l
o
o
o
ci
o
10
N
...
o
o
o
ci
o
o
ci
;;;
o
10
N
o
o
o
~
o
o
o
~
Q)
C
Q)
Cl
::>
W
u>
Q)
3:
.9
Q)
Cl
"
it:
E
Q)
u.
Q)
Q)
C.
E
8
.9
Q)
.S
Qi
Cl
"
'C
(ij
C
o
i::
"
"
.. u>
~-g
'g.~
~~
o
~
a)
O'l
q
;;;
~
10
O'l
o
o
o
ci
o
o
,.;
...
o
o
o
ci
o
o
,.;
...
o
o
O'l
o '
o
ci
10
.....
o
o
O'l
o
o
o
O'l
u> u>
e e
o 0
ell ell
I
>.
~
'(ij
m
.9
""
Q)
e
()
~
g
~
Q)
Q)
C.
E
o
o
.9
Q)
.S
Qi
0>
"
'C
(ij
C
o
:E
-0
-0
ell
e
.3~
<Tell
00
<0::
o
co
~
a)
O'l
q
;;;
~
10
O'l
o
o
o
ci
o
o
,.;
...
o
o
o
ci
o
o
,.;
...
o
o
O'l
o
o
O'l
o
o
o
O'l
u>
e
o
ell
C
.9
C
ell
iXi
.9
-0
ell
o
0::
I
>.
~
'(ij
m
Q)
Q)
C.
E
8
.9
Q)
.S
Qi
Cl
"
'C
(ij
C
o
:e
-0
"
ell
.~~
g'~
<:r
co
'"
10
cD
co
...
~
'"
O'l
o
o
o
ci
10
'"
...
o
o
o
ci
o
'"
...
o
'"
o
'"
o
o
'"
u>
e
o
ell
ell
e
ell
Q)
u>
::l
-0
Q)
X
:;
(ij
>.
o
0::
C
:c
""
~
ell
e
ell
e
::>
10
C
e
':;
<T
o
<
o
...
~
'"
O'l
o
...
o
o
o
ci
o
co
...
o
o
o
ci
co
o
co
o
o
co
u>
e
o
ell
""
Q)
e
()
..
Q)
o
C
Q)
0-
en
Q)
"
~ -fi
8. .S
[ ~
l!? ..
~ 0-
ell ell
~ e
a: ..
Q)
:r
C
2
ell
E
<
(ij
C
o
E
-0
"
ell
.~i ~
g. CD .~
0:2 0
<0:: <
.9
l!?
~
g
~
>
it:
Q)
'N
C
Q)
:><:
o
:::;
0>
C
o
(ij
u>
ell
e
ell
e
::>
10
C
..
$!
-0
C
.!!!
co
'"
10
cD
co
...
~
'"
O'l
o
o
o
ci
'"
N
...
o
o
o
ci
o
'"
...
'"
,.:
O'l
o
'"
N
o
10
o
o
10
.
u>
e
o
ell
N
'"
'"
N
O'l
...
...
~
10
O'l
o
o
o
ci
lq
~
...
o
o
o
ci
o
o
Ili
...
'"
N
o
o
.,;
.....
O'l
o
o
'"
o
o
o
'"
e
::>
1U
C
-'
~
.~ 0
~ ~
.~ L3
8, ~
~ -'
-0 ~
~ as ~
~ f!? c(
Well Z
co
o
'"
~
co
i
~
10
O'l
o
o
o
o
o
o
i.
...
o
o
10
~
o
0;
N
...
10
ci
!
<"!
~
'"
~
...,
~
N
co
N
o
...,
~
N
co
N
u>
e
o
ell
o
o
o
ci
o
'"
...
~
o
~
o
o
o
ci
o
'"
...
o
o
o
ci
o
~
~
...
N
<"!
~
~
ci
CD
...,
~
o
CD
":
~
u>
e
o
..
C
;S
.~
CIl
o
ell
0-
u>
C
Q)
0-
o
1:
~
~
'C
c"8
~o
",,€
.- 0
.~~
u>Cl
~.~
'52:-
2Q)
O-c
OC
:;;~
CQ)
ellu>
-::>
eo
._J::
::>t::
<T::>
~8
"'! O'l
~ ci
-'
~
o
~
:><:
0::
<
Q.
Z
~
::::i
o
Q.
o
~
W
::e
o
o
o
o
o
'"
...
'"
f/'l
~
...
'" -.t
N co
'" 0
&ri' uS
'" .....
... -.t
Ili
N
...
~
o
o
~
~
.
N
~ ~
N 10
o
o
o
o
o
'"
...
o
o
q
t:
;;;
o 10
o N
q 'l""'a
~ ~
..... CD
~ '"
... cD
-.t
...
o
o
o
o
o
~
:it
o
o
q
~
.....
;;;
o 0
o 0
C!. co
~ ,.:
..... '"
~ 0
... Ili
CD
...
<"!
~
~
'" ..;
o S
O'l
ci
-.t
ci
-.t
cO
o ::l
~
It!
<<! ('I') (W') T""
....cio:g
O'l
o 0
o
~
O'l N
c:i co
;;;
u>
e
o
..
...J
~
o
I-
W
()
0<(
0..
en
...I ffi
~ 0..
~ 0
~ ~
::::i 0<(
.S ~ ~
-g u. 0::
.!!! -' 0<(
~ c( Q.
':; U ~
8' ~ w
< en Z
Q)
u>
::>
o
:r
-,
:::;
en
....
o
1:
,g
~
'u
J!
C
~
..
:!!
o
:!!
i
C
;;;
q
;0
...
"'0'"
~~~
~~!
...
~
;:l;
~~g;
...0...
o
o
o
ci
10
;;;
000
000
ON 0
o oqa ci
I~l1
o
o
o
ci
~
...
000
000
ONO
ci:ici
~...~
... ...
'"
o
NgT""
'"
'"
o
NO~
~
ell
Q)
m := ~
~
ell
Q.
Q)
2
C
o
:::;
o
-0
C
ell
C
o
a,
C
:c
III
ell
3:
10
~
ell
0-
>.
e
0-
u>
0-
o
Qi
>
Q)
o
~ ell
~ ~
~~
5 = ~
~ dl ~
8~~
]j ~ :s
Q) 5l 3:
~.9~
~~~
~ ~~
~ .~ 8
g 2 g
u> ell "'
0- 0- 0-
000
lJ~
Q) Q) Q)
000
co
Q)
OJ
'"
C.
o
E
Q)
:::;
co
o
o
N
..;
1::
a.
0<(
,::J~
~
...s;:
c~_
's 6 g
:"'0
eel
0.
~
.si e
.5e~
Gel(/)
.t
I _ C
~" U zQ) .2 olJ ... en
'uCU. .l!tJ'O
~~e-~o ~ c; S
..l!!o..o CI!OIL
() () ~el
"c::c
.. 0 ..
ii-;:;E-
oE~g.:g
J- ~ &J 0
w~~
, ....-0
.!!ccn'OtJQ)
;.~ ~ 4i .e-g
~.-..(Z~~
i"5l =
t::-o....
c ()
~~<
i!g:
8";:~
<-....
~_ en
- c e
~~~
c
l;o
:g
..
::J
a
!J
'2
:::l
U).t:
Oi
~e
C)
all
III
l!!
~
tl
GI
'0' l:
... 0
o.~
. ca
l: (,)
caE
0::((
~
';:
o
';:
0.
"C
l:
.. ca
<(tl
GIGI
:c'O'
ca...
1-0.
C>>
~
~
N
'"
co
co
N
C>>
;;;
'" '" co
~ ~ ~
r{ ~ g
Z;~~
~
g,
"<t
<f-
'"
"<t
?ft. rfl. ;;:e
('I')COQ,
<0 '" '"
o
o
o
o
o
o
.0
'"
o
o
10
<0
a
000
000
0010
o o~ N
IO<O~
Z;Cf)q
;;;
o
o
o
o
o
o
.0
'"
o
o
o
gf
<0
'"
000
000
000
ggg
;;;;;;C'l
;;;
o
"<t
o
~ g ~
o
"<t
o
T" g ~
~
II)
~
()
III
III
Q)
II)
m ~ ~
'E
o
i
:c
10
1:!
III
o
""
'2
Ol
'iij
.,
.~ Q;
~"8
l!l.E
g~
30.
E E
E 8
8~
II) 0
III a.
II) '"
"Oc
Q5:c
u::~
~ ~
~m
~~
0..2>
0-
a.;u;
>"0
~~
a.
:c
~
Q)
€ 5Z
l!l. ~
.S Q)
o .S
.0 E
Q) Q)
C .0
III .... II)
o 0 Q)
'ill €.~
.c 0"0
Q) c: C
00 II) III
~ ~ i
Q) 'u 3:
S ~ ~ ~
~ m~~
<;:: ~ II) .~
~ 0 Q) Q)
~ 0l3:0l
:J .g c:: "0
.~:g ~ :€ ~
l)iho~ca
:i:O:E.!!2e
~g ~ ~ '[
~"fi~g.g.
'>~'>l~
e"" e Q) Q)
0.. ~ 0.. 0 0
'"
'"
III
Q)
ill
""
'"
3:
w
3:
Ol
:S
II)
'x
Q)
c
;S
.~
II)
Q)
~
'u
~
~
~
E-
Q)
~
-0
C
III
II)
"0
III
Q)
==
~
Q)
"0
;;
e
0..
'"
.....
co
as
'"
'"
<f-
'"
'"
o
o
o
o
C>>
'"
o
o
o
o
<0
;;;
Ol
~
en
"<t
;;;
<f-
<0
'"
o
o
o
o
"<t
10
...
o
o
o
o
'"
.....
...
<0
<0
~
E
s
o
.c
Ol
::J
e
.,
ill
~
'u
~
Q)
~
~
E-
.$
.!:
"0
c
III
<Ii
"0
III
Q)
==
~
!d
'e
-Q)
o.c a. a.
0= 0 0
~~~g!
Q):2 Q) CD
00:: 0 0
'" 0
~ t8
~t
;;;
~ cf!.
<0 <0
'" '"
o 0
o 0
o 0
cici
'" 10
...~
o 0
o 0
o 0
cci
co 10
'" "<t
...
~ 10
~ 10
II)
III ~
Q) 'E
3:
w
3: E
1: .$
ill ~
~ ~
'0 .~
~ a;
g? .g>
~ ~
E-.,
~ "5
"0 ,g
C Cl
III ::J
<Ii e
-g =
Q) II)
:6 ~
~ 'u
!d~
~ ~
o
~
.0
"<t
;;;
<f-
'"
.....
o
o
o
o
l'l
...
o
o
o
o
o
'"
...
III
Q)
II)
~
'u
~
Q)
~
o
:5
:5
.~
~
..
a.
Q)
]
II)
"0
Q)
10
o
.Q
.2:-
e
1:!
:'J
"0
e
~
o
o
Q)
"0
.;;:
e
0..
co
co
'"
N
10
~
...
<f-
<0
'"
o
o
o
o
10
10
...
o
o
q
o
10
10
'"
III
Q)
Q)
o
C
III
.<:
c
Q)
-i
..
0..
~
00
~
c
c
32
00
10
J!l
~
"0
C
..
'"
Q)
i!S
'u
~
~
~
E-
~~
.- .0
Q)'-
~~
eg
0.. III
'" '"
;Z ~
ci ~-
..... "<t
"'10
...
~:::.e
~ ~
o 0
00
00
ci 0-
'" 0
~q
;;;
00
00
o q
00
'" 0
;;;C!.
;;;
III III
Q) Q)
III ~
e III
III ~
C ~
~ ~
~ g
"0 ~
.S .5
III ..
~ ~
III ..
~~
o.li
II) _
-e ~
;g "5
i3 e
~j
.~ !
0..0
co
~
~-
.0
'"
~
N
10
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
;;;
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
...
III
Q)
.!:
~
Q)
1:!
Q)
o
o
'"
..
::J
0-
{g
.$
~
~
'2
::J ..
EI!!
E III
o Q)
~'5
I! 00
::J~
""CD
::J C
.~~
300
E~
0.'><
0"
J~
~~
~
Q)
1:!
Q)
()
~
'2
::J
E
E
8
"0
C
III
~
'u
~
()
~
::J
0-
III
"
o
~
o
"5
o
"0
.!:
"
'm
E
a.
o
~
Q)
o
~
o
o
N
.....
'"
,..:-
'"
<f-
'"
It)
o
o
o
o
o
o
.;
;;;
o
o
o
o
o
o
.;
;;;
III III
Q) Q)
~
1:!
Q)
()
c
o
~
::J
"0
W
]j
c
CD
E
c
e
.;;:
c
w
a.
o
~
Q)
o
o
o
<Xl.
<<;
;;;
"<t
It)
"l
~
'"
<f-
N
~
N
o
o
o
.0
.....
<0
...
o
o
o
o
o
'"
...
o
o
o
o
10
......
~
'"
o
o
o
o
o
'"
'"
III
Q)
Q)
II)
::J
o
I
~
Q)
>
ii':
"0
C
:c
Q)
.0
Q)
""
II)
c
.Q
10
o
::J
"0
Q)
]j
c
Q)
E
c
e
.;;:
c
Q)
a.
o
~
Q)
o
.<: -I
g <:(
::J I-
.!!l 0
10 I-
o VI
.0 W
~ i=
ii': ::i
Q) U
:a; <:(
E IL
~ Z
~ 0
-g ~
o w
lil IX
II) ()
.. W
g.IX
~ ~
Q) W
o z
;;; ~
q ell
co ~
... ~
~.
...
0 0 0
'" '" ...
~ <f- <f-
a 0 0
0 0 0
'" '" '"
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 .0
0 10 .....
'" ~ '"
... '" '"
~ '" ~
~
~ '" ~
~
II)
III ~ III
Q) () CD
III
'"
~ ~ c
1i to III
~ 0.. ~~
Qj ::J ..
'" ~ :::; 0..
:S en Q; c
..
.. E E
)( N
.. to Cl
.<: ::J
'" 00 () I-
c Q) CD Q)
.~ "0 "0 "0
~ I! ~
Q. Cl Cl Cl
.5 a. a. a.
:J :J :J
~ 'i/!.
'" ~
o Q
o Q
o N
000
C>> ell
'" ell
....,;
..,
...
o Q
o Q
o '"
0"':
Ol ..,
'" Q
"'as
'"
...
III
Q)
.....
Ql
Cl
<1l
0.
o
E
Ql
::E
CD
o
o
N
..;
'i:
0.
<{
/ ..
/ '-7)
, /
\.
~
"'.c
c-_
- ~ In
~e8
e!C!)
0..
~
~ = lU
'E ~ :;
=;~~
Ii.
b-a _ v g ..,
'ijQ)~z ~J!!:>>~
[~2'~o ~:is 3
.!o..o c'-Ou..
U U ~C!)
"Dee
.. 0 ..
s1;i~K1n
o E'- 0 0
....;: 6-Gi 0
In u >
w<(~
.!!cU)o~-g
&~~.€-g
~._<(z~~
~ -g :3
1::'" ..
~~~
ween
g-~ ~
<(-<(
~_ en
_ C ..
.. .. ..
~E~
o
~
'E
'"
::l
o
.l!l
'2
~
I/),c
O~
0: 0
Q. ...
C)
c6
III
l!!
~
t)
CI)
'0' c
... 0
0..;1
. III
C U
1ll..2
ii:<(
~
';:
o
';:
0..
"
c
.. III
<l:t)
CI) CI)
:0'0'
ell ...
....0..
oo>ocnoo
~:;fh;*~
~ (f)~ ,....~
tfl ~ ~
?!.. ;; ~ooo ; tfl. ~ '#. *' ~
0:;' U')oU')oo-.q-
00000
ER-OtflQtA-
o 0
to .0
N N
... ...
ao&C)lOO
iIt.,.,.~~~
~r2~~
... ... ...
00
... ...
C") ..... 0 'V
C") C") ~ (f')
'<t '<t
<<i N M
om N
"'... ...
...
g~~ggg~~
o 000
o .000
~ ~ ~ ~
...
~ '#. ;:;e. rfl. <fl ';!.?fl. ~
~;1;oot::~o ~
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
tOooooocio6oari'o
t;~~~~~~~~~t;~
...
'" ~
~'I""""""''''''T'"".q-f6
~ ci
'" ~
~'I"""",.............."'tf6
ci
.. ..
~ .. ~ '" '" '" '"
U lD 0 Q) Q) Q) Q)
'" '"
(U -g
"" 0
~ ~
.c :0
.~ c E
'~~ ~ Ji
;~~~~~~...
,~:g~~~~~~
:I:j~~~~~~
~g~~~.5'~~
Umc;;-,'E~::>c
Q) CD CD Q) CD Q) Q) (I)
g-o-c"OE"Oeg
~ I;, I;, 1;,.9l I;, Cl~
Ifi :3' :3' :3' ~ :3' :3' Ifi
N ..... ...........
N ..... ..........
..
~ ra co m
o Q) Q) Q)
'"
..
c
o
'in
';;
~
Cl
C
~
'"
a.
Cl
c
'6
::l
13
,5
C5
o
a.
."
C
'"
..
S
C
<Il
U
~ ~
0.. "8 ~
~ ~ .:2 IS
~ en ... U
c C
>. Q) <<J 0
<Il ~ ~ ."
~ ~ ~ ~
~a..!cn
~ig.~o<ll
I;,E~c
a. 0 Q) Q)
::> U 0 It:
00
00
~~ ~
ON
;%ti>
00000
00000
00000
g~g-g ~
",....",,,, <0
-.;fC',f0i1t tfl
... ...
~ ~ ..... ~
.....~
'"
If?<o::t".,-
.....;!
m co <<I co to
Q) CD Q) Q) Q)
c
'"
0:
c
<Il
C E
'" 2l
a. c
.. '"
c .s E -2
~ ~ W
a.e.! 10
~~~:s
.. '" '"
'" a.'~ :I:
g E ." I- Q)
o..~~,m .g>
~ 0.. e ::l ii:
..Q c 0 III CI)
C52.sli;E
J:<<JCI)g32
,g~~8.~
S e c. (J) 1:
Q) Q) Q) Q) Q)
E ~ ~ ~ ~
a. a. Q. J:: Q..
.5.5.51fi .5
o 0
... ",
<0
..:
<0
...
o 00
~ tit ~
..:
~
M
....
~
o
o 0 0
... ... 0
..:
~
'"
...
o 00
o 00
o 00
g g ~
'" ",....
~tltu)
....
o
<0
'"
N
o
<0
..
e
u
..
.. ..
2! '" e
u <Il u
'" '"
.s:::
~
o/l
~
c
Q)
Q)
~
Q)
.Q
-"
Q)
e
U
~
if
~
~
.2
..
Q)
It:
cf:,~
o ~
N
",
~ N
N
N
",
~ N
N
c
'"
0:
~
S
..
c '"
'" ::;
0: ~
Ai ~
~ ~
E ::l
o~ ~
0; c
Cl C
"0 :i:
ii: (/)
C c
Q) CD
E E
!!
.5 .5
o
...
<f!.
o
o
...
o
",
N
'"
",
ti>
o
o
",
'"
o
o
",
'"
""
..
2!
o
u.
-l!:
'"
0..
~
u
'c
-0
C
Q)
:I:
c
:c
""
~
.!!l
~
<Il
:0
'in
..
2l
u
..
Q)
."
';;
e
0..
'"
<0
m
or;
ti>
o
...
<f!.
;t
<f!.
o
o
o
o
or;
N
...
o
...
o
o
o
0"
o
....
...
o
o
o
0"
~
....
N
'"
N
N
..
e
u
'"
(I)
l!!
u
'"
c
'"
0:
C
Q)
E
Q)
Cl
'"
C
'"
::;
~ gi
~ 32
.. ~
~ ~
'"
m
c
.2
:;(
..
.E
'iii Q)
c ...
'" -0
100 g-
e 8 "
::l C -.::
1:5 ~iE ~
2 .. <Il
~ ~:ii
:s m..a
c~
~ .g ::J
'6> <( 0
a) .$ e
~ ~-
~ g ~
~ ~~
..
e
o
u.
~
'"
0..
~
u
'C
.".
C
Q)
:I:
c
Q)
E
Q)
a.
.5
o
...
<f!.
o
o
...
o
o
o
0"
o
o
or;
...
o
."
C
'"
C
o
""
'"
e
u
e
o
....
00
0....
o
0"
N
~
...
~
:x,
'"
<f!.
o~
00
~
o
...
00
00
00
oaS
NCO
:; ~~
...
o
o
o
;t-
<0
M
...
00
00
00
o~ ci
00
<0 <0
"'",
...
o
'"
'" ~
o
'"
'" ~
..
l!!
u
'"
en
e '"
u Q)
'"
."
C
'"
C
'"
0:
C
<Il
E
a.
o
~
Q)
o
0..
en
<(
3:
Oli!
I-
c
o
.Q
.Q
ii:
-0
C
'"
'"
-"
u
'"
'- ~
S ."
C 0
2l ~
c ~ ~
'" Q) ::l
~~ j
m ..c .9
~ ~
E ..
.s::: S
u C
c Q)
'" U
';0;
~.g,
~ ~
cU
Q) Q)
~ e
Q.~
.5::>
li;
-"
"'c
en",
cO:
0..
""<Il
<(-
..
Q) '"
.,::;
0.0..
Een
0<(
UW
~
"'-
~
...
<f!.
N
o
o
o
0"
o
N
....
o
o
o
0"
o
'<t
...
<Xl
<Il
0>
<1l
a.
o
E
<Il
:E
N
'"
..
e
u
'"
..
~
g
'"
."
C
'"
Cl
C
~
..
Cl.."
a.C
o <Il
~~
Q)o
0..
<0
o
o
N
-.i
1':
a.
<t:
,;_h'."~,,,"
It ')
c:-
'".c
<:--
E~8
=1.,.0
eC!)
IL
c:-
~ :5 41
'E ~ :a
:;~i7J
n:
, .... c
~" _.. 0 oll
'u.~Z ~J!!~~
nI'ti'o-S'O > c:s c
Q."ii ... lb 0", 0 ::3
~"'Q.8 i<.? LL
0:
-oc1:
-.!~E_
~E~g.~
....... aQ;o
.. u >
w<(~
~c='O~i
ff~ t) Gi -; 5
<( <(ZILLL
~ ~ :
;~G
ll.LL<(
Ji c ~
c-.2t
.:t~<(
~_ w
- <:..
.. .. ~
~E.:t
Q
!;
c
'"
::J
a
s
C
::>
cn,c
~~
0.(5
O/S
11/
e
~
1)
QI
"0' l:
0:::8
I III
l: U
1ll..2
0:<
~
"I:
o
"I:
0.
"C
l:
.. III
<1)
QI QI
i-[
1-0.
o
<I>
~ ';j!.
o 0
o
<I>
o
o
o
i
<I>
t1l t1l
Q) Q)
(5
o
.c
o
en
Q;
.c
Q)
00
.c
'"
"0 ~
o Co
o :c
~ I!!
~ Q)
::J c:
t1l 1::
-' l1
ro .~
'" en
g>J:
~ ~
~ 10
'"
Q) 1::
o ::J
<: 0
~ ()
$
c:
'n;
:::;
Q)
o
t1l
Ci.
Q)
0:
o
...
'"
w
w
t
~
o 0 a 0 0
* ~ fit ~ ftt
a> 0 '"
~ E/t ~
~ ~
o 001'
N "l
<I> ~
~~rfl.';j!.~~~-o!.
aoooo~or;:;
o
<I>
o
o
o
ci
o
~
...
?f!-
~
N
o
o
o
ci
o
W
<I>
~~~~~
000
o <I> '"
o r-.
c5 r--,'"
~ ~
<I> ,.:
...
000
00'"
00 "!.
cic:i~
00 W
qqm
,... """" M
<1><1>001'
...
,- r--- """" <r- <r- 'I"""" ,.... 'r"'"
o
o
o
ci
o
N,
~
...
00000
00000
o 0 0 0 0
0000-0
~~~~~
,... ",....,.... T'"" T'"" ,... <r-
m m rn m m m ~ m
Q) 4) Q) CD CD cD Q) Q)
'"
'c
c:
Q)
I-N
Q)'"
e~
~~
c:
t1l
n:
~
$
'"
t1l
:::;
Q)
'"
::J
o
J:
:;;
>
~
--
o
Q)
'"
t1l
.c
c.
"0
c:
~
'"
..
;;
Ci.
E
o
()
E
~
0>
Ie
Co
c:
,2
~
o
c:
l!1
t1l '"
e "0
CI) aJ &.
E>-o>
o t1l c:
gCi.'i5
~ ~ ~
~ :!2 ,0",:
a.:2 f/J
~ ~ .~
~ I ~
0: 0 0
'"
E '"
$ E
~ .!
'" ~
c: '"
o 0>
~ .5
o>l:
:5 g
~ ~
t1l t1l
Co Co
~ ~
> >
o 0
c: c:
Q) Q)
0: 0:
..J
g> ~
'u 0
{g I-
::J '" If)
'" c: w
~~i=
g> ::i
:0 ~ (3
~ E c(
.~ ~ u..
~ ~ ~
5 E f=
~ ~ ~
.~ -g w
.! ..c w
Q) e >
~ Q) 0
o ~ IX:
c"'5.Q.,
~ E ;!!l
s
c
CI>
E
CI>
>
e
c.
,5
..
..
CI>
U
U
..
;;;
co
i
<I>
?f!-
a>
.".
o
o
'"
ci
~
~
<I>
o
o
o
ci
10
~
t1l
Q)
0>"
Co
t1l
:::;
c:
o
N
en
Q)
Q)
~
~
t1l
a.
~
~
t1l
-'
oll
>-
'6
c:
Q)
'C:
LL
.s
'"
li'l
g
t1l
~
e
Co
E
;;;
<Xl
i
<I>
?f!-
~
o
o
10
ci
~
~
<I>
o
o
o
ci
10
~
t1l
Q)
0>"
Co
t1l
:::;
c:
o
.".
en
Q)
Q)
~
c:
g
:!E
"0
c:
'"
"0
iij
o
c:
~
.s
'"
..
Q)
o
o
t1l
~
Co
E
;;l;
10
cD
'"
<I>
?f!-
~
o
o
o
10'
r-.
...
o
o
o
ci
o
~
t1l
CI>
~
Q)
c:
~
t1l
C.
"0
o
o
€
o
.c
.c
0>
'0;
c:
Q)
Q)
E
.s
~ E
Gl Gl
E E
~ ~
e e
Co Co
EO>" ,5
'~!
t1l0
CoN
000
JQ)
~~
'"
'"
,,;
<I>
"e
a>
.".
o
10
r-.
00
~
o
o
o
.0
N
<I>
t1l
Q)
c:
o
W
00
Q)
Q)
~
"0
o
o
€
o
.c
.c
0>
'0;
c:
'"
~
~
Q)
'"
.s
'"
'"
Q)
g
t1l
Co
O~
-'"
~Co
Q) t1l
0:::;
;;;
<Xl
i
<I>
""
~
.".
o
o
10
ci
~
~
o
o
o
ci
10
~
t1l
Q)
Co
t1l
E
c:
o
r-.
en
Q)
Q)
~
W
en
"0
c:
t1l
'0
o
o
~
0>
'0
W
>.
Q)
c:
C
~
-"
c:
~
LL
.s
'"
'"
Gl
U
o
t1l
~
Co
EO>"
;;;
<Xl
i
<I>
?f!-
a>
.".
o
o
10
ci
~
o
o
o
ci
10
~
t1l
Q)
0>"
Co
t1l
:::;
c:
o
;;;
Q)
Q)
~
~
t1l
a.
I
~
::J
t1l
-'
"0
c:
t1l
C
::J
o
E
'n;
LL
.s
'"
'"
Q)
u
o
t1l
~
Co
E
iii
i
<I>
"e
a>
.".
o
o
10
N'
~
~
o
o
o
ci
10
~
t1l
Q)
0>"
Co
t1l
:::;
c:
o
'"
en
Q)
Q)
~
~
t1l
a.
c:
2
t1l
E
<(
.s
..
'"
Q)
o
o
t1l
~
Co
E
;;;
co
i
<I>
"e
~
.".
o
o
10
ci
~
o
o
o
ci
10
~
t1l
Q)
0>"
Co
t1l
:::;
c:
o
10
en
Q)
Gl
~
~
t1l
a.
c:
t1l
E
0>
?=
.s
:z
Q)
o
o
t1l
~
e
Co
E
;;l;
10
cD
'"
<I>
?f!-
a>
.".
o
o
o
.0
r-.
<I>
o
o
o
ci
~
<I>
OJ
Gl
0>
t1l
a.
o
E
Gl
::E
t1l
Q)
0>"
Co
t1l
:::;
C
o
10
0:
Q)
Q)
~
~
t1l
a.
0>
:S
'"
'x
Q)
.s
'"
VI
Q)
g
t1l
~
e
Co
E
<0
o
o
N
.;
1::
a.
<(
~v
e:-
m.c
c-_
.- ~ "'
~l!8
eel
D..
e:-
m.c ..
.5 ~..
.El!~
'ielU)
It
. - ~ oa
~"it)~ ;."...cn
u_.cn...co_~-g
[.!! e- ~ 0 oc> ~ 0- .?
m l!! D.. 0 .. (5 -
000::
"cc
-.!:8e_
~E]g.8
1-;:::IQiO
.nff~
<(0
~ en"';"
6-.2e2.f~
~~~:!~~
~~ =:
~"O ..
~~~
.!s=
D" _ ti
~=<(
.
!c ::
.. .. ..
~E~
Q
~
C
m
'"
a
:l
'E
::l
rn,c
~~
0."-
C)
oll
1/1
l!!
~
ti
<II
'0' l:
"- 0
0.;:
. III
l: U
1ll.2
ii:<i:
~
';:
o
';:
0.
"
l:
.. III
<(ti
<11<11
:a '0'
Ill"-
1-0.
.
.
M
c.
'"
::a;:
c:
o
CD
0::
Q)
Q)
~
~
'"
C.
0>
c:
~
.;(
Q)
.9
VI
VI
Q)
(.)
(.)
'"
!!?
2
c.
.s
;:\
It)
<D
'"
~
;;t.
~
o
o
o
Iii
....
~
o
o
o
o
~
~
'" '" '"
Q) Q) Q)
M
c.
'"
::a;:
c
o
'"
~
..
"
~
VI
..,
Qj
u:
..
~
E
en
.9
VI
.,
"
8
m
l'l
c
m
.c
c
W
~ ~
<<i cD
'" '"
~ ~
&; ~
'<t '<t
o 0
o 0
o 0
I{)- aO
.... ....
~ ....
o 0
o 0
o 0
ci ci
o 0
;; Z;
M
0.
m
::a;:
c:
o
'"
~
"
Q)
~
~
m
c.
'"
c:
'"
...J
"0
c:
o
lD
""
...
Q)
3:
e
lD
.9
III
VI
l'l
(.)
'"
'"
(.)
c:
'"
.c
c:
W
;g ::::
'" '"
<D co-
~Z;
~ ~
Ol 0,
'<t '<t
o 0
o 0
o '"
t6 ,....~
.... '"
~ ....
o 0
o 0
o 0
06
~ ~
~
~ m
c:
o
'"
~
"
'"
~
M-C
i~~
'" ::a;: .@
::a;: c: 0
cOo.
o ,.... (j)
CD~o>
~ '" 5
m ~ ~
~~o;
c '" 0
o D..
~ C
.c: Q)
en (.)
~ e
f~
ti VI
'" VI
C Q)
c 8
8 '"
!!? l'l
2 ai
c..c
.s &i
o
....
~
Ol
'<t
o
....
o
o
o
o
~
....
m
"
a;
0>
C
:g
'"
C.
"0
C
'"
VI
VI
Q)
(.)
(.)
'"
!!?~
2'"
c.o.
E'"
_::a;:
'<t
'"
'"
cD
'"
....
;;t.
Ol
'<t
o
o
o
Iii
....
....
o
o
o
o
o
;;;
'"
'"
m
"
"0
C
m
Ol
~
$
~
-c
m
D..
o
(.)
VI
<(
"0
c:
..
o
o
.c
(.)
VI
'"
'N
c:
Q)
-"
~
~
.9
.,
Be;;'
~~
l'l~
c:o
~~
&i~
o
....
~
o
o
~
o
o
o
o
o
'"
...
'"
"
e
'"
.c
~
VI
"
Cl
"0
'c
.t:l
~
Q)
c:
"0
"0
..
-i
..
a.
c
2
..
E
<(
a;
'"
'"
Cl
"0
'1:
.t:l
c:
..
E
III
'"
"0
Q)
C.
~~
a~
&~
....
'"
Ol
~
~
o
(;j
o
o
o
~.
....
o
o
o
N
'"
....
o
o
o
'"
o
o
o
'"
"=
"0
C
'"
III
o
o
.c:
:;l E
."
~j,
'" III
c."
c:-"
~:c
~-g
Q) ..
.t:lE
J!l"
5ij,
EIIl
~~
~~
.- 0
",-
",,,,
,,"0
88
m-e
8"..8
J-s,
~.~
c
m
....c
Q)1i)
2 Q)
3/"0
en~
.co>
l~
I: '"
3:0
0)(
-Q)
~E
0"
~j,
.5 II)
oc
;~
C Q)
~.l;
~~
....
0. .
.5 ~ '2
c 0.2
:5:;S
~:E ~
al en .-
o.-i g
a.mn;
,.2 a.. Q)
!~ :g
OlD.t:l
o
~
~
;;;
~~~
~~
~
(;j
'#.'#.~
oN N
o
o
o
o
o
....
....
000
...00
o 0
o. a-
o 0
'" '"
... ....
o
o
o.
o
o
"<l:.
;;;
000
000
000
coo
g g ~
....... ...
'"
Q)
'" m m
Q) Q) Q)
E
i
en
"
" Cl
~ ~
8lw
o~~
.c a. "
g !!? E
J!! 'u; ~
:€ 5i 2
o .c: 0.
c: e .s
:g ~ <(
Q) 0 0
8 (.) <(
'" Q) Q)
~ Q) j
2o.C.
0. E E
.s88
<J)
~
o
;;;
CD .... N
~_;!: r::
M g ~
.... '" ....
...,..;
~
;;t.
(;j
e;e. ~ ?f!.
N ;; ~
o
o
o
o'
It)
....
o 0 It)
o '" N
ON'"
00"':
~ ~ ~
fl"tNN
... ."
...
o
o
o
o
o
;;;
o C> 0
o C> '"
o 0 N
ci&;~
~ ,.... r-:
ER- ""'... ~
... ~
...
o
~
Q)
0>
..
C.
o
E
Q)
::a;:
'"
Q)
g;:
~
>
ti
Q)
C
C
o
(J
o
o
.c
(.)
:g
'"
0.
l'l
C
'"
.c:
C
'"
.9
Q)
'"
I:
~
~
o
0::
!!?
2
0.
.s
...I
.c(
....
'" 0
c: ....
Q) U)
"E ....
'" z
C> w
Iii ::!!
~ w
Cl ~
.9 a::
0. ..J
III :! ~
~ 0
'" (I) I-
Q) U) C
"0 W Z
.~ g ~
D.. .c( el
,""
<0
o
o
N
..f
'E
C.
<(
/-"'\
i,Vi") .