Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Kelly encouraged support of the motion which initiated focused work, consistent with the <br />staff’s request for direction. He said it was consistent with community interest in support for the <br />market and strategies in the Downtown Plan. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor was supportive of the Farmers Market but concerned having only a few minutes to <br />make a decision about on-the-fly motions. He asked for examples of projects that could support <br />the market. Ms. Bettman cited electricity, wastewater and infrastructure issues that could be <br />assigned a cost and considered in the next fiscal year. She said a longer-term project such as a <br />semi-permanent structure could be scoped and brought back to the council. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Mr. Papé, moved to extend discussion time <br />by ten minutes. The motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Ortiz voting in opposition. <br /> <br />The amended motion passed, 7:1; Ms. Solomon voting in opposition. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to direct staff to continue <br />work on development opportunities and implementation of the <br />Downtown Plan. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said the plan was supposed to be conceptual but she believed it was used as a <br />“weapon.” She said the plan worried her; there were many things in it she did not think were <br />good ideas and she would vote against the motion. <br /> <br />th <br />Mr. Papé concurred with earlier remarks about the need for an overpass at 8 Avenue and Mill <br />Street and urged that the option remain open with the design of the parking garage. He <br />encouraged the council to continue to have regular discussions on downtown. He hoped that <br />locations downtown could help with opportunity siting and asked if the Central Area <br />Transportation Study (CATS) discussed a north side parking structure. Mr. Sullivan replied that <br />the north end scoping project addressed the issue of parking in association with the train station <br />and he would research whether north end parking was considered in CATS. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly commented that there were some implementation strategies and example projects in the <br />plan with which he did not agree but did not think the council’s action in 2004 or currently bound <br />it to those strategies as anything significant had to come to the council for discretionary action. <br />He used the parking garage as an example and pointed out that it was consistent with one of the <br />implementation strategies but any member of the council was free to oppose it. He supported the <br />motion on the floor. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy noted that sustainability was not specifically mentioned in the plan but hoped that it <br />would be a factor in consideration of downtown projects. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said that fixed rail transit and a walkability assessment were implementation strategies <br />that should be worked on. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said she would vote against the motion because the community perceived it as a <br />plan and, in order to have a plan and move in a responsible way towards objectives, there had to <br />be specifics, benchmarks, a blueprint, and financial constraints. She said when a project was <br />presented to the council, the community and the media expected it to be supported because the <br />plan was adopted unanimously and any project was consistent with the so-called plan. She said <br />downtown deserved a real plan with benchmarks. She mentioned that a main theme of the plan <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 19 Page <br />6 <br /> <br />