Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Mr. Kelly thanked legal counsel for his efforts in making the changes now before the council. It was <br />important to him that the design elements were included. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Meisner's comments about the Growth Management Study policies, Mr. Kelly said certain <br />areas within each neighborhood are more amenable and less amenable to higher densities. He thought the <br />site in question was very much amenable to higher densities as it was not surrounded by single-family <br />houses and was located off a major street. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly agreed that affordable housing was a City goal, but he pointed out the City had approved property <br />tax exemptions for housing that was not low-income to meet various other goals. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon expressed support for the motion. She expressed concern about the council ;;picking and <br />choosing" design features on an application-by-application basis and asked if that was allowed. However, <br />she was supportive of what was before the council given that the developer had presented it. City Manager <br />Taylor said that the materials clarified what the developer proposed and the resolution codified the proposal. <br />Mr. Lidz said it would be legal for the council to impose the condition as a condition of the benefit. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ concurred with the remarks of other councilors in support of the motion. He said the resolution <br />guaranteed the City would get what the developer applied to build. He noted the risk that accompanies <br />development of apartment units, as no return was guaranteed and the developer could face substantial <br />personal liability. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor saw no benefit to the community from the development. She thought it could be a perfectly good <br />development but questioned why the City should support it or guarantee the developers a profit. <br /> <br /> The motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting no. <br /> <br />Noting that there was time remaining in the work session and a full agenda for the regular meeting, Mayor <br />Torrey called on the Council President for a motion regarding the Consent Calendar. <br /> <br />3. CONSENT CALENDAR <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Pap6, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey noted that Ms. Bettman and Mr. Kelly had submitted corrections to the minutes earlier, and <br />deemed them accepted as submitted. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman pulled Item D, the Legislative Policies Document. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap6 pulled Item C, a resolution authorizing the sale of electric utility bonds. <br /> <br /> The remainder of the Consent Calendar, with the exception of items C and D, passed <br /> unanimously. <br /> <br />Speaking to Item C, Mr. Pap6 determined from Ms. Cutsogeorge that the money would be used for the <br />Carmen Smith facility reauthorization. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 2004 Page 11 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />