Laserfiche WebLink
change the inventory once it was adopted, but new information could be included in the next round <br />of action on the inventory after it was adopted. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey asked if property owners were assisted in understanding the inventory process, the <br />impact on their property, and what information they could provide to request corrections. Mr. <br />Bj6rklund said that a substantial amount of assistance was provided to individual owners, although <br />not every owner's request for a change was accepted if the information did not warrant a change. <br />He said when the record was opened again during the next phase of the process, a request could be <br />addressed again if additional information was received. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey asked if there was compensation for owners who were unable to use a portion of <br />their property because of adoption of the inventory. Mr. Bj6rklund said there was no regulation <br />attached to adoption of the inventory, so there was nothing in that part of the process to prevent <br />people from using their land. Mayor Torrey asked how a property could be removed from the <br />inventory, once it was adopted. Emily Jerome of the City Attorney's Office explained that the next <br />step of the process would be further analysis of each of the sites by staff to determine the level of <br />protection that was warranted. During that process, a property owner would have an opportunity <br />to provide information that might lead staff and the council to decide that no protection was <br />warranted because of conditions that existed on the site. She said that would be part of a Metro <br />Plan amendment. In response to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Bj6rklund said that property <br />owners who were parties of record would be notified of the council's decision on the inventory. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked what effect the council's adoption of the inventory would have on a property <br />owner who did not believe his or her property should be listed. Mr. Bj6rklund said the owner <br />would know that the property was included in the next stage of the process and would be further <br />analyzed in order for a recommendation to be made on whether protection was warranted and at <br />what level. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pap~ moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to adopt Council Bill 4839, <br /> an ordinance concerning Goal 5 inventory within the UGB. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey opened the floor for those who wished to speak to the motion. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner stated he would support the motion and thanked staff for the care with which the <br />recommendation was prepared. He said that pertinent to his support of the motion or any other <br />approval of the inventory was that the next step of the process looked at not only what level of <br />protection was warranted, but what was the most effective form of protection, including cost- <br />effective factors. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly thanked staff for its work on the inventory process. He expressed regret that it had <br />taken eleven years to reach that point and noted that the staff recommendation before the council <br />was not the same as the Planning Commission's recommendation, which had been decided against <br />by a majority of the council. He stated his preference for the Planning Commission's <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 28, 2003 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />