Laserfiche WebLink
4. ACTION: <br /> <br />Motion to Reconsider Area 15: Jefferson Westside Neighborhood <br /> <br />Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to substitute the following mo- <br />tion for the tabled motion he made earlier in the evening during the work session: to initi- <br />ate amendment of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan General Area Plan (Metro Plan), of <br />the Jefferson/Farwest Refinement Plan, and the Land Use Code to limit the subject area to <br />Low-Density Residential development. In addition, the motion would direct the City Man- <br />ager to make this one task one of the high priority tasks on the Planning Commission work <br />plan and to accomplish this as quickly as practicable within the parameters of the amend- <br />ment process. Unless the council took further action with regard to the subject area, the <br />subject area shall revert to allow Low- to Medium-Density Residential development on <br />July 1, 2008. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé remarked that as he understood it, this was the only neighborhood affected by the <br />housekeeping amendments the council approved. He hoped that the City could get “ahead of the game” in <br />terms of opportunity siting and to the kinds of infill standards that were needed so the City could develop <br />the kind of density intended through the Metro Plan. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly asked his colleagues to consider his comments from the work session as they contemplated <br />their votes. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman indicated she intended to support the motion. She believed the City could absorb <br />increased population without “destroying neighborhoods.” She encouraged her colleagues to look at this <br />motion as a way to put things back the way they were before they adopted the housekeeping amendments to <br />the Metro Plan in ignorance of the actual explicit impact to the neighborhood. She averred that the motion <br />before the council would start the public process and would allow people the opportunity to fairly <br />participate in decisions made regarding their neighborhood and homes. <br /> <br />Councilor Ortiz stated that she could not support the motion because she did not consider it to be the <br />council’s highest priority. She acknowledged that the neighborhood managed to get together and solidify <br />their vision and bring it forward. Her concern with the motion was in line with her concern regarding the <br />livability of all neighborhoods. She understood that a neighborhood would prefer to keep their area as <br />pristine as possible, but she felt that the more barriers put up against densifying a neighborhood the less <br />opportunity other people had to live in better neighborhoods and to have better lives. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor supported the substitute motion. He said the real focus for him was not whether or not it <br />was a certain level of density; rather he wanted to place a high priority on getting some standards that could <br />be used in all neighborhoods. He averred that the City needed to manage growth in a thoughtful and <br />careful way that both acknowledged and recognized the need to keep neighborhoods as livable as possible <br />as Eugene accommodated further growth and density. He reiterated his support for the motion, adding his <br />prediction that it would only force the issue to come up in another way. <br /> <br />Councilor Taylor called the motion a step toward correcting a mistake. She felt it was only to protect the <br />neighborhoods that homeowners had bought into in order to protect their investments in the neighborhood. <br />She felt this motion would bring justice to the neighbors and would be an asset to the entire community by <br />protecting a central neighborhood, while working to prevent urban sprawl. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 11, 2006 Page 6 <br /> Regular Meeting <br />