02/10/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilmqn Murray wondered how much discussion had occurred in the Task Force on proposed "makeup of the steering commi ttee, whether nonmetropoli tan jurisdictions having representation on the committee would contribute to a study. He recognized the complications involved in growth but wondered about the relative advantages and disadvantages of limiting a study to a smaller area, not just to the city of Eugene, but to just the urbanized area. Douglas Hallpy, LCOG director, pointed out the difficulty of determining interest of other communities which would determine the amount of their financial support. He said the outline presenting the scope and conduct qf the study and direction the study would take were still open, one al- ternative being for Eugene to undertake it alone. He felt that would preclude other factors outside the metropolitan area which would ha,ve a bearing. In the strictest sense, he said, the metropolitan area is the entire county. Mr. Halley continued that a co-operative approach was the best way to effect the greatest con- trol over problems that would be created for the governing body - problems having to do with air and water quality, etc., that are not limited by political boundaries. Other factors including policies being set by the LCDC would have an impact which would encnuraae tnlO! more comprehensive type of study. Councilman Murray expressed concern that a steering committee compr~s~ng various public officials would change the nature of the study as initially proposed, that originally a citizens committee was proposed. He wondered how much time public offi- cials could give to what was sure to be an extensive process. Mr. Halley noted in- volvement of the citizens advisory committee (MAPAC) and the need for blending its responsibilities with those of elected officials in addressing the problem. Also, the involvement of local staff which he considered important. He couldn't see the work turned over completely to a citizens group. He had no quarrel with Mr. Murray's sug- gestion that it be done on a "more 50/50 basis." Councilwoman Beal recognized the factors outside the urbanized area affecting any growth study but she said the initial proposal was to base the study on the area covered by the 1990 Plan, the metropolitan sewer study, ESATS, etc. She said the major concern was to give citizens information about costs related to growth on which to base decisions about extending sewer services, transportation, and other services to areas outside the urban area. Mr. Halley said cost factors were considered in the attempt to analyze what the study should cover. Manager added that the outline presented centered for the most part on the area with which Mrs. Beal was concerned, recognizing some considera- tion would have to be given to the effect that factors outside that area would have on the growth pattern. With regard to the cost factor, he said that the outline pre- sented definitely covered an effort to determine alternatives of costs as growth oc- curred or: did not occur. Mayor Anderson suggested referral of the growth study outline to Lane County and Springfield for their consideration. Mrs. Beal said she would like to confer with Councilman Murray on some suggestions for clarification of the study outline. She asked postponement until that could occur. Manager explained that probably any amendments the Council might suggest would be attached to the outline and then the document referred to Lane County and Springfield for review and at the same time to the various budget committees for consideration of funding. Councilma~ Bradley asked where the Planning Commission would fit into that routine. Manager said the outline could be referred to the Commission for recommendation, but parallel referral to the. budget committee would probably be desirable because of im- pending budget work. He added that the Planning Commission was represented on the TaskForc~ in preparing the study outline. Councilman Keller expressed concern at the assumption that the study was going to be undertaken. He said he would be opposed because what was proposed was not what was originally intended and because there was considerable information already available. In light of the economic situation faced by the city, he said, budgetary questions should be answered before taking on an expenditure of this magnitude. Also, it should be known whether support would be forthcoming from Lane County and Springfield and other jurisdictions which would be affected. Mayor Anderson directed that.final action be postponed until the February 12 committee meeting, pending further review of the study outline items by Mrs. Beal and Mr. Murra.y. 2/10/75 - 18 '=>0 e e Comm 2/5/75 Affirm .