07/22/1991 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Plan. He said that the material prepared by City staff accurately summarizes the intent of the plan. The suggestions made by the Planning Commission with regard to the plan are acceptable to the University. There being no additional requests to speak, the public hearing was closed. Ms. Ehrman inquired about the process that was used to receive student input on the plan. In response, Ms. Taylor said that the U/CLC was primarily in- volved in plan development. The U/CLC is composed of representatives from the Fairmont Neighborhood, South University Neighborhood, West University Neighborhood, and adjacent businesses. The Campus Planning Committee also reviewed the document and has a student representative on that committee. Ms. Bascom flagged for the council's Wednesday discussion that councilors pay particular attention to Appendix D which describes those policies arrived at as part of the Riverfront Research Park study and the treatment of the Willamette Greenway. She noted that this part of the plan accurately summa- rizes the long, involved process that was a part of creating the Riverfront Research Park study. Ms. Bascom noted that the plan identifies only a few trees as being signifi- cant and asked about the rationale for including those in the plan. In re- sponse, Mr. Ramey said that the trees that are mentioned in the plan have "recorded" significance within the University heritage. Additionally, there are many groups of trees on the campus that are not "recorded," but have some historic significance. In response to a question from Mayor Miller, Mr. e Ramey said that the Eugene Tree Ordinance has been interpreted to extend itself onto the campus. The University follows the guidelines of that ordi- nance. Mr. Boles said that because this is a land use planning document, there should be an opportunity for the larger community to be heard on these is- sues. He asked about the citizen involvement process that was followed for the plan, particularly non-university citizens. In response, Ms. Taylor reiterated that the U/CLC and the Campus Planning Committee were involved in plan development. She noted that the compilation of existing policies into a single document is only the first phase of future campus planning. In Phase 2, the University intends to take a look at new ideas which would result in suggested revisions to the plan. Ms. Taylor said that it will be more impor- tant to incorporate citizen input in Phase 2 of the process. Mr. Boles asked about the status of the U/CLC prior to developing this plan. In response, Ms. Taylor said that prior to undertaking the plan, there was some discussion about reconstituting the U/CLC in order to make it a more effective working group. This occurred and the first task for the reconsti- tuted committee was to assist with the preparation of the plan. Mr. Boles asked what certainty there is that Phase 2 of the plan would ever occur. In response, Mr. Ramey said that there are several items in Appendix C that are meant to be addressed in Phase 2. In addition, there is ongoing academic planning in progress at the University which will reach conclusion e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 22, 1991 Page 5