CC Minutes - 04/09/01 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Meisner suggested the motion be revised to indicate that Mr. Johnson would consider, rather than follow, the councilor input in developing the plan. Mr. Kelly and Ms. Bettman accepted Mr. Meisner's suggestion as a friendly amendment. Mr. Kelly said that the legislative history should reflect that a majority vote of support indicated there was weight behind that consideration. Ms. Bettman supported the motion, liking the idea that the council had given input and its direction would inform how key steps were implemented. She had a reservation about the recommendation for angled parking. While she was generally opposed to angled parking, she was willing to consider it in situations where it did not result in the expansion of the width of the existing street or take up part of the sidewalk, and asked for council concurrence on those points. Mr. Rayor noted his support for the motion. Regarding the motion prepared by staff on his behalf, he said that the motion captured some but not all his concepts. Mr. Rayor objected to the process used to review the plan to this point, saying the council had been unable to "put our touches on it." The council had been unable to offer amendments to the vision and have them voted "up or down." Mr. Rayor thought the vision was "mostly good" but he had "bicycle points of view" he had been unable to incorporate into the vision. Ms. Taylor supported most but not all the items on the list, thinking most needed further examination, and expressed concern that they would go forward if the motion was approved. She preferred to wait to vote on the entire package of proposals associated with the vision. Ms. Taylor also expressed concern the City was attempting to do too much at one time. Mayor Torrey supported the motion, and suggested that direction be given to the staff to put the question of opening Broadway on the ballot. He thought that the council should find out whether the citizens want to open the street, saying he would work to secure the funds to open the street if the voters approved. He suggested a September or November 2001 vote. He asked staff to comment on the impact of the motion. Mr. Johnson responded that Mr. Kelly was trying to get the manager to consider council input on the items on page 5 and 6 in the packet. He thought it was necessary because of all the things that were discussed; he believed that staff had captured the nature of individual councilors' interests, but there was not yet consensus expressed for all. Ms. Nathanson suggested a bullet be added to the list on pages 5-6 to acknowledge Mr. Rayor's bicycle concerns. Mr. Rayor believed that his concerns were largely captured under bullets 2 and 4. Mr. Johnson suggested that the information distributed by Mr. Rayor be considered an explanation of what was intended by bullet 4. Mr. Rayor accepted that approach, although he continued to maintain that the Willamette River bicycle path not emphasized enough in the vision, and he wanted staff to consider that. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly said that the intent of the motion was not that staff consider the items on the list as the opinion of a single councilor; rather, the council as a whole was asking the staff to keep those issues in mind. Mr. Johnson added that staff will keep track of the items on the list and report back to the council on how the list was affecting implementation of the plan. Ms. Taylor indicated she could not support the motion if it meant all the items on the list would be implemented. The motion passed, 6:1; Ms. Taylor voting no. The council considered the six key next steps identified by Mr. Farmer.