Item 3D: Ratification of IGR Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman asked that the paragraph 4 on page 3 of the minutes be changed to reflect the change the committee made to the relevant legislative policy (“The City will continue to oppose proposals for intensification of use in rural areas outside city urban growth boundaries.”) Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to adopt the minutes of October 26, 2006, as amended. The motion passed unanimously, 2:0. 3. Review of Grant Application Mr. Sullivan was present to answer questions about the grant application. Ms. Bettman asked questions clarifying the details of the grant, determining from Mr. Sullivan that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first funded environmental assessments and then the City could seek additional dollars for specific site mitigation, that 15 percent of the grant would be used for administrative purposes, and that the City would work with established neighborhood organizations and organizations such as the Toxics Alliance to establish priority sites. He anticipated that staff would form a department advisory committee to advise staff, and that would also include neighbors. Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Sullivan recalled that the 108 grant application was submitted to the Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) approximately a year earlier; it was approved by HUD for both urban renewal districts. However, to spend those dollars, the council must approve each individual transaction, followed by HUD approval. The council had yet to act on a transac- tion. He reminded the CCIGR that it had discussed the Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) with staff last year, and the City had received a $2 million BEDI grant in conjunction with the 108 grant, representing roughly 20 percent of all funds in the program. He anticipated that future 108 application would have a component that was 80 percent funded by the 108 grant and 20 percent funded by BEDI. Ms. Bettman asked if staff had identified likely sites. Mr. Sullivan said no. Staff’s original intent had been to work with the owners of industrial properties in west Eugene and encourage them to think about redevelopment and infill in those areas. Among the greatest barriers to infill in such areas was the threat of environmental contamination or the presence of such contamination without knowledge of its extent. However, the EPA did not find that compelling, and subsequently staff had expanded the boundaries of the area to include commercial properties and the downtown core. The EPA was seeking a mix of private and public properties and, for example, staff anticipated that the Eugene Water & Electric Board property might require some analysis. Ms. Bettman asked if the neighborhoods would be involved in that process. Mr. Sullivan said that under the grant criteria, public involvement prior to application submittal improved the application’s chances of success. He said that neighbors would be involved early and throughout the process. Ms. Taylor asked who would be the subcontractor performing the assessments. Mr. Sullivan said that assessments were generally performed by engineering firms with the appropriate expertise. Ms. Taylor, seconded by Ms. Bettman, moved to approve the grant application. The mo- tion passed unanimously, 2:0. MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations November 21, 2006 Page 2