CC Minutes - 07/14/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman supported the process objectives outlined by Ms. Levis. She thought that having a commissioner at the table was a good idea, and wanted to ensure that the commissioner present represented the entire commission. Speaking to the issue of infill and design, Ms. Bettman disagreed with the contention that people did not want density in their neighborhoods. She believed that residents wanted design that was compatible with the neighborhood and that the council had eliminated the mitigating elements that could have made such density more palatable to neighborhoods, such as pocket parks, narrow streets, and wide sidewalks, because they were regulatory in nature. Ms. Bettman said that when the Land Use Measures Task Force discussed density, it discussed it in combination with those mitigating factors. She said that as long as the City was "cramming density down people's throats" without compatibility, it would meet resistance. Ms. Taylor thanked Mr. Rusch for his statements and said she hoped the council could reconsider its direction to staff as it regarded the upland sites in the inventory. She believed it would be good if commissioners were present and said she had appreciated having the minutes to review when a controversial item came up. She said she would appreciate an explanation of the two points of view and having a commissioner present to explain even one no vote would be useful. Mr. Poling thanked the commissioners for their work. He said that reading the commission's minutes had been a real learning experience for him. He said that a memorandum reviewing the commission's discussion and the thought process that had gone into its decisions would be useful. Mr. Poling welcomed any commissioner who wished to adopt him. He said that he had met Mr. Belcher for coffee once and learned a great deal. Mr. Poling said that while he appreciated the commission's work, the councilors were the elected officials who had to make the final decision on policy. He took into account all information from the commission as well as the input he received from staff and the community. Ms. Solomon said that several commissioners had reached out to her and she appreciated that outreach. She looked forward to working with the commission in the future. Mr. Pap~ thanked the commission for all the work that it did. He appreciated the commission's deliberations and the time it took to reach a decision. Mr. Pap~ thought that the Planning Commission Plus Three had been a very good process and questioned why there were no councilors on the commission, given that there were councilors on other bodies such as the Police Commission and the Human Rights Commission. Mr. Pap~ called for a second round of comments. Mr. Kelly found it sad that the commission's heavy work load and continued staff reductions made it impossible for the commission to take on the three highest priority post-LUCU work program items: the South Hills Study update, the alternate code path, and asset mapping for selective intensification of use. He thought all three items would have made a difference in the long-term. Mr. Kelly requested an update on the progress of the LUBA remand work on LUCU and the estimated time line for completion of the remaining items. Ms. Childs responded that staff had been overly optimistic in its previous estimates. The needed ordinances will take longer to prepare than originally anticipated. In the case of the needed housing ordinance, the council had MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 14, 2003 Page 5 Work Session