Laserfiche WebLink
Mayor Torrey said as long as the record was clear that it was the council's intent that development <br />would be allowed north of the tracks, he supported the amendment. <br /> <br /> Mr. Pap~, seconded by Mr. Rayor, called the question. The motion to cease <br /> debate passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting no. <br /> <br /> The amendment passed, 7:1; Mr. Pap~ voting no. <br /> Mr. Kelly, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to amend the motion to modify <br /> the fifth bullet on page 27 to add the following [italicized text added]: "Some <br /> reduction in traffic on Broadway, resulting in the removal of at least one lane <br /> of traffic, thus providing an opportunity..." <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that the amendment spoke to the design of Broadway and Ms. Laurence had <br />indicated comfort with it. He said that the amendment would result in a more pedestrian-friendly <br />street. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said she was inclined to vote against all the amendments because she thought it would <br />make it easier for the council to proceed with adoption of the concept plan. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman supported the amendment, saying that it committed the City to the promise it made <br />from the outset to diminish the right-of-way as the tradeoff for extending the State highway <br />through the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner asked if staff found the amendment acceptable. Ms. Laurence said yes, with the <br />understanding the City still has to work through the design issues with the Oregon Department of <br />Transportation (ODOT). Mr. Reinhard concurred. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson opposed the amendment because it was too specific and tied the City's hands to a <br />promise it could not yet keep. The City had to work with ODOT on the final street design, and <br />she preferred to leave the text more general because of that. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr agreed with Ms. Nathanson that the amendment was overly specific. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ said he would also oppose the amendment because it meant the removal of one lane that <br />could not be restored without council approval. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey indicated he would oppose the amendment if the vote was a tie. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rayor, seconded by Mr. Farr, called the question. The motion to cease <br /> debate passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Ms. Bettman voting no. <br /> <br /> The vote on the amendment to the motion was a 4:4 tie, Mr. Kelly, Mr. <br /> Meisner, Ms. Taylor, and Ms. Bettman voting yes; Ms. Nathanson, Mr. Farr, <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 31, 2002 Page 11 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />