New Search
Page 1 of 3 <br />MEDLIN Johnny R <br />From: Mary O'Brien [mob @darkwing.uoregon.edu] <br />Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2003 12:07 PM <br />To: gary.d.pape @ci.eugene.or.us; Johnny. R.Medlin @ci.eugene.or.us; <br />Andrea.G.Riner @ci.eugene.or.us; Carolyn. J.Weiss @ci.eugene.or.us; <br />Carrie.A.Peterson @ci.eugene.or.us; Renee.L.Grube @ci.eugene.or.us <br />Cc: cpa @efn.org; mayorandcc @ci.eugene.or.us; stevej @nsdssurvey.org; <br />trevor.h.taylor @ci.eugene.or.us <br />Subject: RE: CPA proposal for Amazon Park options process <br />Dear Gary, <br />On Monday, November 24, you wrote to me, asking: "Why should the next Amazon Park project <br />be singled out for a special process not afforded to all the many other park projects over the past 4 years <br />from the '98 Parks and Open Space bond measure ?" <br />Here are some thoughts in response: <br />1. The Parks Department continues to find itself embroiled in similar controversies over intense <br />development at parks such as Rasor and Kinney Park. Amazon Park is generating a large amount of <br />controversy that is creating public ill will against future bond measures if a good process is not used by <br />which staff and citizens can make decisions based on community priorities. While staff insist there is a <br />"need" (read "want ") for more ball fields, the existence of data regarding compa rative usage of ball field <br />space and other recreational space in Eugene's parks has not been made available to us. Meanwhile, <br />community surveys show that people want a balance in their parks. <br />2. When, at the November 20 meeting, the Amazon Park planner was asked how she was going to <br />prioritize expenditures, she said she did not know. A process that reviews community use, weighing <br />such factors as daily, seasonal, community, and geographic usage is good planning. While city staff say <br />that there is a huge desire for more sports fields, the daily park usage and the incredible love of this park <br />as a place to enjoy nature is not similarly documented or apparent to them. People want natural places <br />they can walk to from their homes. <br />3. Because no clear public process has existed, recent park improvements in the Amazon Park <br />corridor have been driven by seasonal, highly organized, parking- and vehicle- intensive, sport usage <br />rather than other community use improvements (e.g., path connectivity or native landscaping). The <br />following construction has been undertaken in the Amazon Park corridor with more than $6 million <br />since the 1998 bond measure was passed: installing new lights for two softball fields, building two <br />lighted sand volleyball courts, resurfacing the tennis court, purchasing in -line hockey liners for two <br />courts and building stadium seating for the sport, filling and draining two soccer fields, and co- building <br />a lighted multi - purpose soccer /football stadium, as well as the only site - specific bond improvement, <br />rebuilding Amazon Pool. The Amazon Park and surrounding public lands have become a maze of chain - <br />link fences, parking, and bright night -time lights. The Amazon corridor has been targeted by the Parks <br />Department as "the sports park," but there are many more people who use the park on a daily basis who <br />would like to see balanced expenditures of park improvements towards daily usage an d long -term <br />natural amenities. <br />Piecemeal decisions about parks, driven by piecemeal community input are neither wise nor publicly <br />accountable. For instance, Skinner's Butte was slated for a ball field and additional parking but instead <br />12/16/03 <br />