Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Zelenka asked when the council would receive information about what other sources of funds might be <br />available to purchase the property. City Manager pro tem Jones said staff would provide that information to <br />the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka repeated Ms. Taylor’s question about whether the time line gave the council sufficient time to <br />act. City Manager pro tem Jones said yes, staff could schedule the item, but the question was whether the <br />council would have sufficient information to act upon at that time. It was staff’s goal to have that <br />information to the council in the time frame proposed. If the information was not available then, it would be <br />rescheduled for the first available meeting date, and she would inform the council of that fact. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy recalled a condemnation action in Springfield that involved no controversy, and suggested that <br />staff check into how that occurred. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy, Mr. Klein said staff would get any Lidar information provided <br />by the neighborhood group to the geotechnical engineer. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy asked about the potential of separating action on the two properties. Mr. Klein did not think <br />there was a problem with creating two different ordinances, noting there was a potential that the appraisals <br />could result in different council actions. That did not have to involve more public hearings given that it <br />would merely be a division of the motion and ordinance <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy asked if the City could back out of a condemnation process once it had begun. Mr. Klein said <br />yes, but the council would have to pay the property owners’ attorneys fees. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling asked if the appraisal would involve consideration of appraisals done on other properties in the <br />area. Mr. Klein indicated that information was considered private information. Mr. Poling asked if the <br />council could have that information. Mr. Klein said he would attempt to secure it. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling asked if one appraiser was doing both appraisals. Mr. Klein said that a firm was involved; the <br />principle appraiser was doing both appraisals with assistance from other members of his firm. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark recalled he had also asked staff about the property owners’ investment in attempting to comply <br />with the City’s land use laws. He asked if that information could be provided by the time the council <br />received the appraisal. Mr. Corey said that it was difficult to answer the question. He said the City could <br />provide information about the cost of going through City processes, but he could not provide information <br />about the private costs the property owners incurred. Mr. Clark asked if the City could ask the property <br />owners the information and if there was a reason not to. Mr. Corey thought the City could ask for the <br />information of interest to Mr. Clark but he doubted the property owners would provide it. Mr. Clark asked <br />about the numbers mentioned at the public hearing. Mr. Corey said the City had no way of confirming the <br />accuracy of the information. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark asked if Lidar was an established science for establishing where to build houses. Mr. Klein said <br />the geotechnical engineering analysis was established and the commission found it lacking in information. <br />Having geotechnical information was a requirement of the code for such an application. He did not know <br />about Lidar and said he could ask the City’s geotechnical expert the question. He said the expert must be <br />prepared to get on the witness stand and testify as to his professional opinion, taking into account the <br />information about Lidar. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 22, 2007 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />