Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
<br /> VI. LAND USE APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE REVISION <br />. (Fee revision distributed to Council) - <br /> Mr. lieuallen said he would like further discussion on the fees at the <br /> Council Goal Session. He would like to know the magnitude of the dollars <br /> involved. Manager noted the fee revisions included a 10-percent across- <br /> the-board increase. The amount of additional money is $9,000, raising the <br /> amount collected from $88,000 last year to $97,000. <br /> Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, to approve the revised <br /> fee schedule. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> VI I. GROWTH MANAGEMENT STUDY--PRESENTATION <br /> (Report distributed to Council) <br /> By way of background, Mr. Farah explained that a technical analysis by <br /> staff had been given to the Goals Committee for review. The Planning <br /> Commission and Goals Committee encouraged the Council to conduct a commu- <br /> nity goals conference. In January, the Goals Committee took comments <br /> and began drafting a replacement for Chapter 3. It was referred to the <br /> Planning Commission in the spring for public hearings and passed June 11. <br /> Recommendations were forwarded to the Council, which is what is before the <br /> Council at this meeting. Mr. Farah highlighted points made in the report <br /> and Mr. Lieuallen noted that control of the growth rate is a hot issue and <br /> stated that, if the growth rate were restricted in the Eugene area but not <br /> in other areas in the county, the situation might not be very different <br />e from simply allowing the city to grow. Planning Director responded that <br /> every effort is being made to come together to deal with the issue of <br /> growth, in particular, the Springfield area. He believes the city of <br /> Springfield is much more interested in the problem than it was before. <br /> Ms. Miller said that she would like a further explanation of the Farm Tax <br /> Deferral Program at some future time. Jim Carlson, staff, noted that a <br /> study has been done on that subject by the Bureau of Governmental Research, <br /> and copies will be distributed to the Council. Mr. Lieuallen said he felt <br /> it was necessary to have some mechanism for presenting the City's policies <br /> to other public agencies i.e., schools, LTD, and EWEB. <br /> Mr. Obie left the meeting. <br /> Mr. Lieuallen said it appears the urban service boundary is not a common <br /> factor in the cost of land skyrocketing. He would like more study of that <br /> notion. If the urban service boundary is working, there will need to be a <br /> price differential between land outside the boundary and land inside the <br /> boundary. He said it seems a common conclusion that the urban service <br /> boundary is the link between price differentials, and he doesn't think <br /> that planning policy should be passed based on conventional wisdoms or <br /> assumptions about what should happen. Mr. Porter said that more data <br /> needs to be gathered on the price differentials. Ms. Schue asked staff to <br />e <br /> 9/5/79--7 <br /> 18'9 <br />-~- <br />