01/25/1984 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.." . / . I / . "--,~ , e fI, Mr. Obie commented that with any reward there is a risk. He said the issue was analyzed when the council decided to proceed with the Conference Center several years ago. He said it is his personal opinion that the financing method must be done to solve the economic woes of the community. Res. No. 3828--A resolution authorizing the advanced refunding of certificates of participation. Mr. Obie moved, seconded by Ms. Wooten, to adopt the resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. x. URBANIZATION REPORT (memo, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the agenda item. Jim Farah of the Planning Department presented the staff report, reviewing the Planning Department memorandum of January 17,1984. He said the report provides a series of policies on urbanization and that staff will be presenting further information on this issue to the council in the future. He said that the council directed the staff of the three jurisdictions at the intergovernmental dinner in the fall to proceed in intergovermental policies dealing with urbanization; he said a memorandum will be sent to the council from the ASD providing the status of that work. Responding to the December 15, 1983, MAPAC letter included in the council packet, Mr. Farah said MAPAC suggests giving the subject of urban/rural transi- tion a high priority. He said staff is prepared to take that position if so directed by the Planning Commission and the City Council. He noted that the transition issue is not currently a high priority item. He said MAPAC also suggested that differential levels of system development be charged. He responded that the City is already performing that function, stating that annexed land that is already developed does not pay the same systems development charge as does raw land. MAPAC suggested that too many high priorities exist for annexation. Mr. Farah, referring to the paper, stated that the West and Southwest Eugene areas are shown as having a high priority for annexation because of the developable land for the City. MAPAC suggested that the City should add a policy which would assist in the identification and protection of historic and prehistoric archaeological resources which may be harmed by devel- opment following annexation. He said staff is not in the position to perform that function due to the lack of area expertise and funding. He stated that Jim Carlson of L-COG was present to answer any questions on the issue. Mr. Ball stated that some differential charges already existed. He asked if staff felt the differential should be increased. Mr. Farah said he felt it would be an error to do it at this time; he felt the City should study how the development processes work and what income occurs from the systems development charges over the next few years. He said a slight increase in land use credits was already being observed. Mr. Holmer stated that Policy B.7 addresses the question of Phased Annexation. He asked if the document is adequately respons1ve to the discussion held in Santa Clara the previous evening. Mr. Farah said staff understands that the MINUTES-Eugene City Council January 25, 1984 Page 10 -- /- --~- 1/