Laserfiche WebLink
follows: "The University of Oregon is currently engaged in a feasibility study <br /> for a new basketball arena. Based on the outcome of that study and further <br /> action by the City Council, an arena may be considered as an appropriate use <br /> within the courthouse district." <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Rayor, moved to amend the motion to modify the <br /> plan diagrams on page 6, 8, and 11 to remove the specific road drawn north <br /> of the tracks between 5th Avenue and the Riverfront Research Park and the <br /> specific shading of "residential/mixed use" north of the tracks, and replace <br /> them with a legend that says "riverfront area development and street function <br /> and locations are to be determined, based on the principles on pp 13-14." <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that the amendment did not preclude development north of the tracks, but made the <br />plan diagram consistent with the text. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked Ms. Laurence if the courthouse construction plan would be impacted if the <br />council did not adopt the concept plan today. Ms. Laurence said no. Ms. Taylor said she thought <br />the council was rushing unnecessarily to adopt the plan. She did not think the process had been <br />adequately publicized, and the public was not aware of the proposal to extend 6th Avenue to <br />parallel the railroad tracks. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman agreed with Ms. Taylor that the project was on an unnecessarily fast time line. She <br />indicated support for the amendment as being more consistent with discussions held by the <br />Planning Commission + 3 regarding the conceptual nature of development north of the tracks. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner confirmed with Ms. Laurence that the amendment would not preclude development <br />north of the tracks. He indicated support for the amendment. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson said she would support the amendment with the understanding that the principles <br />mentioned on page 13 were still endorsed by the council. <br /> <br />Speaking to Ms. Taylor's remarks, Ms. Nathanson said that slowing the plan adoption process may <br />not stop the construction of the courthouse, but it could impede collaborative efforts between the <br />City, the federal government, and other State and local agencies. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor supported the amendment for the reasons stated by Mr. Kelly. He believed that it <br />would be premature to identify development north of the tracks without further study and analysis. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ opposed the amendment. He said that people need to understand that there is <br />development anticipated and he thought the schematic did that well. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 31, 2002 Page 10 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />