05/13/1991 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Boles questioned the importance of the council's motion that night be- cause of the fact that the vote was only tentative. Ms. Childs said that if the council denied the request for approval of the amendment, it would need to direct staff to prepare additional denial find- ings. Mayor Miller asked how much discussion time he should allow at the public hearing following this meeting. Mr. Green suggested that since this issue would definitely return to the council, discussion should be limited to one and one half hours. Ms. Ehrman said each councilor should comment on the amendments to help provide staff direction on findings. II. WORK PLAN SESSION Ms. Ehrman asked how the Eugene Decisions process was affecting council Goal II, specifically the Retail Task Force Report and the Downtown Plan Review and Revision. Mr. Gleason said Eugene Decisions required a great deal of staff time which would otherwise be spent on projects identified as part of the Council Goals. He said Hillary Kittleson, of POD, was the Coordinating Manager for Eugene Decisions. Ms. Childs said that, in terms of the POD Work Plan, certain projects were being temporarily postponed if staff had not already been dedicated to them, rather than postponing something staff was already working on. ~ Mr. Gleason said Eugene Decisions was similar to a General Plan rewrite, and would include just as much citizen input, but that it was being accomplished on a tighter time frame. Mr. Boles said that some of the POD Work Plan projects being delayed by Eu- gene Decisions have been major Council Goals, such as the Retail Task Force Report. He said an ordinance on Section 4 was needed quickly. Mr. Gleason said Ms. Childs could work on revising the list of Council Goal items postponed due to the Eugene Decisions process. Ms. Childs said items could be rearranged as the councilors chose. She noted that the Spring- field-initiated Gateway Refinement Plan was being delayed due to issues which were completely unrelated to Eugene Decisions. She further noted that the West Eugene Wetlands Study, the Metropolitan Natural Resources Special Study, the Metropolitan Industrial lands Special Study, and Metro Plan Amendments were all items which would be considered in a joint hearing with other juris- dictions, for which reason they could not be delayed. Mr. Gleason said that as the City has made cutbacks, the planning program has slipped each year. He said the Metro Plan has slipped even further and staff time tends to be spent on planning intricacies rather than metro-wide plan- ning. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 13, 1991 Page 8