New Search
August 1, 1997 <br /> To: City Council, Mayor, City Manager <br /> From: Frank Drysdale, Eugene Resident <br /> Re: Response to my letter of July 14, 1997 concerning removal of <br /> tress at Broadway Place <br /> Thank you for asking Mr. Hibschman to respond to my inquiries. <br /> You have each received a copy of his July 30, 1997 response. You <br /> are each aware of the binder of meeting minutes, memoranda, and <br /> other items regarding the Broadway Place project. The binder is <br /> in the reference section of the library at 711.4. You each have <br /> a copy of my inquiry of July 14, 1997. The intent of this letter <br /> is to respond to your reply of July 30, 1997. <br /> • <br /> Citizen Involvement <br /> Minutes of the Citizen involvement Committee meeting of June 1, <br /> 1995 clearly show that more than one member of the CIC raised <br /> questions about the adequacy of public input. The actual <br /> resolution passed reads "approve the citizen involvement plan <br /> with a recommendation to the City Council that it consider <br /> including further neighborhood representation on the West End <br /> Planning Advisory Committee." <br /> Minutes'of the CIC for March 7, 1997 underscore the CIC members' <br /> concern that citizen input was inadequate. One member says "that <br /> the committee had approved the citizen involvement process with <br /> recommendations, and those recommendations were not followed." <br /> Another says, "that a public hearing at the end of the process <br /> was meaningless as, short of scrapping the project, there was <br /> little the City could do with the input." A third member says, he <br /> "was opposed because the citizen involvement plan, from the <br /> beginning, was inadequate and it did not follow enough of the <br /> City policy on public /private development process....the CIC's <br /> recommendations were not taken -seriously. " - A fourth member noted <br /> "that the project was considered "high interest".. and the citizen <br /> involvement flowchart did not reflect that." <br /> Neighborhood Concerns <br /> Yes, traffic was a -primary concern of the Westside and Jefferson <br /> :_neighborhoods This was a good example -of; project developers <br /> working with the neighbors and physically changing designs to <br /> accommodate neighborhood concerns. However, there were other <br /> concerns voiced at'the June 11, 1996. Westside and Jefferson <br /> neighborhood meeting. They included scale, cost, project <br /> ownership, and trees. The project developers never returned to <br /> meet with the neighborhood groups to address those concerns. No <br /> vote of approval was ever given by the neighborhoods regarding <br /> any aspect of the Broadway Place project. <br /> � E -- <br /> i ll,' AUG 1 1997 <br />