02/27/1991 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

to traffic. If the ordinance is approved by the voters, it is the City's ~ intention to implement the plan as consistent with the design as possible. Mr. Gary said that the ordinance does four things: 1) approves the Downtown Design Committee's summary report; 2) authorizes traffic on the downtown mall; 3) amends certain sections of the Eugene Code as needed; and 4) allows the City Council to adopt a phasing plan for the design. Mr. Gary reminded the council that if the charter amendment measure is approved by the voters, additional traffic on the downtown mall would be prohibited without prior voter approval. This ordinance as it is currently crafted satisfies the intent of the charter amendment. Responding to concerns raised during the public hearing, Mr. Gary said that the ordinance does not contain information about financing because the meth- ods and amount of financing have not been determined. Also, the council is legally authorized to approve a method of financing without voter authoriza- tion. Mr. Gary acknowledged the importance of communicating this information to the voters; this information could be conveyed through a significant pub- lic information campaign. ~ Mr. Gary said that the resolution to be approved by the council places this measure on the May ballot. The findings contained in the resolution outline in a complete manner the process which has been followed to date on the is- sue. He suggested that Section 2 of the resolution be amended to direct the City Attorney to prepare a ballot title consistent with the Eugene Code. Mr. Gary said that Ordinance Attachment B consists of comprehensive plan consistency findings. If the ordinance constitutes a land use decision, counsel is satisfied that the findings are consistent with the Metro Plan and any applicable refinement plans. Counsel also feels that the ordinance is consistent with the policies of the TransPlan. However, if the plan is ap- proved, the TransPlan should be amended to include these projects. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Gary said that if the ordinance was found to be inconsistent with the Metro Plan and it was determined that it constituted a major plan amendment, all three jurisdictions would have to amend the Metro Plan. Mr. MacDonald questioned the use of the word "shall" versus "should" in the ballot question. If voter approval is obtained on the plan, he asked whether the City would be ultimately obligated to implement the plan by use of the word "shall." Mr. Gary responded that such wording would not obligate the City to act, but would allow that plan to be phased in. However, if the council is interested, Section 2 of the Ordinance can be amended to state that "upon plan approval, the City may redesign/reconstruct the downtown mall and any such design and reconstruction shall be done in a manner substantial- ly consistent with Exhibit A." Mr. Nicholson said that he shares Mr. MacDonald's concerns. He also remarked that plan approval by the council with an implicit agreement to identify some funding source violates the spirit and commitment of the strategic financial e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 27, 1991 Page 2