CCMinutes - 10/20/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

employment in a "steady state" economy. No one knew how to do that. Instead, people were committed to growth as an economic driver, and he did not think that was sustainable. He believed that a group needed to investigate that topic. He was frustrated by the mayor's comments that the commission should engage topical issues as they arise as he had wanted to do that repeatedly. Issues would flare up but they never came before the commission, or he would attempt to raise them but was warned off because of the potential the commission could act as an appeals body at some point in time. Mr. Rusch suggested the commission's quasi judicial role be split off as a responsibility because it restricted the commission's ability to discuss topical issues. He indicated he was leaving the commission for personal health issues and had thoroughly enjoyed his time on the commission. Ms. McMillan said she was not as frustrated as Mr. Rusch because she had a different understanding of the commission's role. She liked the quasi judicial role of the commission. In regard to the Mayor's question, she said she was excited about the alternate path and thought the commission and council had the obligation to address the issue because of the promises made in the LUCU. She thought the commission's approach was the right one. She also concurred with Mr. Meisner that there were many examples to look at, and cautioned that the City would have to keep cost in mind as some approaches were very expensive. Ms. McMillan thanked the council for the opportunity to serve an additional term and said she would miss the commission. She also thanked the commission. Ms. Taylor thanked Ms. McMillan and Mr. Rusch and suggested the commission consider having the departing commissioners return in an advisory capacity from time to time to take advantage of their experience and points of view. Ms. Taylor agreed with Mr. Rusch that growth was not sustainable. She said both Mr. Rusch and Ms. McMillan would be missed. Mr. Kelly concurred with the comments of Ms. Taylor in regard to the service of Mr. Rusch and Ms. McMillan, and said he liked Ms. Taylor's suggestion that the commission call on retired commissioners for advice. Mr. Lawless said the commission hoped to foster more collaboration when controversial issues such as the East Campus planning process arose. He thought it would put the community miles ahead in reaching positive outcomes. Mr. Lawless believed the commission needed to examine its bylaws and procedures for possible changes. He said the commission was constantly challenged by the internal conflicts created by various planning documents, and advocated for integrating the longer term planning occurring through the Region 2050 process into the Land Use Code Update and commission processes. He also advocated for aggressive and mandated updates to neighborhood refinement plans. Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Taylor, moved to approve the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Planning Commission work program contained in the attached FY04 Annual Report, including the Historic Review Board FY05 Work Program. Mr. Kelly said the collaborative model was fabulous, as demonstrated by the East Campus planning model. He encouraged the commission to consider how that type of process could occur more routinely. He said that collaboration only works if all parties were asked to collaborate. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 20, 2004 Page 6 Work Session