07/24/1991 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-- --- e Mr. Boles asked for further clarification about the relationship between the City as the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) for this land which is not in URA ownership. Mr. Gleason explained that the City has an intergovernmental agreement with the University which governs this property. As the URA, the council will be reviewing where its responsibilities lie within the agree- ment, which primarily center around infrastructure facilities. In terms of this site, there are several other sites on this property that might devel- oped before the URA must extend the infrastructure. Mr. Boles clarified that when the additional infrastructure construction activity takes place, it should be paid for through Systems Development Charges (SDC). In response to questions regarding citizen involvement, Ms. Taylor emphasized that much of the citizen input in the plan occurred through the University/ Community Liaison Committee (U/CLC) which included, among others, a member of the Planning Commission and representatives from various neighborhood organ- izations. Ms. Taylor said that in terms of future plan revisions, the plan would be reviewed every five years by the State Board of Higher Education; the council could review the plan at that time as well. Responding to a question from Mr. Green regarding the City's responsibilities with respect to on-street parking, Mr. Gleason said that the Fairmont neigh- borhood wanted the City to remain aware of its responsibility to remedy park- ing problems in the area, should the University take no action. Ms. Ehrman said that the five year mandatory review should be stated expli- e citly in the plan. Mr. Gleason noted that as a State agency, the University has some proprietary State rights. Phase 1 in this plan is a recognition and codification of the existing relationship between the University and the City. Phase 2 of the plan recognizes the changing nature of the relationship and helps determines changes in the relationship. Res. No. 4263--A resolution acknowledging the University of Oregon Long-Range Campus Development Plan. Mr. Rutan moved, seconded by Mr. Boles, to adopt the resolu- tion. Mr. Boles raised several concerns with respect to this plan. He said that because this is a land use planning document, it should go through the City's accepted citizen involvement process. He noted that the council should con- sider what types of changes will trigger a plan review. He voiced concern over Assumption 3, one of five assumptions from which this plan was formulat- ed, which states that lithe eXisting organization and working relationships among the University, the State System of Higher Education, other State agen- cies, and local governments will continue essentially unchanged." He argued that these relationships will change as a part of the Eugene Decisions pro- cess. Mr. Boles also said that if this plan is to be consistent with the City's plans and policies, the citizen involvement component should be re- e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 24, 1991 Page 6