Laserfiche WebLink
efforts in developing the alternative options and remarked that the 12th and Willamette proposal <br />was a viable proposal as it satisfied all of PeaceHealth's criteria, caused less displacement of <br />homes and businesses than the six-block Hilyard proposal, and allowed the clinic to remain open <br />during construction. Mr. Kelly regretted that PeaceHealth had declined to review that option. He <br />concluded he was dismayed that PeaceHealth was requesting a decision from the council when <br />a comparison of the impacts between the Crescent site and the downtown sites, as requested <br />through a council motion, had not thus far been provided. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey commented that Item 6 would not allow PeaceHealth to make a choice; rather, it <br />would mean that development on the Crescent site would be precluded. He pointed out that it <br />was the responsibility of the elected officials to develop a vibrant downtown, and that it was the <br />responsibility of the Board of Directors of PeaceHealth to provide the best possible medical <br />facility. Mayor Torrey voiced his concern that the additional resources that would be needed to <br />move forward with the above motion would be futile if PeaceHealth was not willing to consider <br />the actions included in the motion. He suggested that items in this motion be passed subject to <br />PeaceHealth's willingness to participate in the process. Mayor Torrey concluded that additional <br />funds would need to be provided by the City to provide a site in the downtown area, and the facts <br />about that must be available prior to the first council meeting in September. Additionally, he <br />stated that if the council passed the items in the second motion to be discussed later in this <br />meeting, the City could proceed with a informed decision and a clear direction to Peace Health. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor stated that the traffic issue would depend on where residents resided and that the <br />availability of transit was the more immediate question. She referred to Item 6 and pointed out <br />that Peace Health had zoned the Crescent site for a short-stay clinic and therefore it was that <br />body who had revised the purpose of the site. Ms. Taylor concluded it was the responsibility of <br />the council to prevent actions that would detract from the viability of the downtown area. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that staff should not initiate the process necessary to grant a proposed medical <br />services zone unless PeaceHealth chose a downtown site. She then referred to Item 6 and <br />pointed out that the citizens in the Crescent area would not be provided an opportunity to weigh <br />in on the issue if that portion of the motion was not supported. Ms. Bettman said she would <br />support Item 6 for that reason and pointed out that such action would not automatically result in <br />an adopted change of zoning. <br /> <br />In reference to Item 6, Mr. Meisner pointed out that staff erred in the language it wrote to include <br />hospitals. He said he could not therefore support that portion of the motion. He then referred to <br />items 1 through 5 and said it was critical that PeaceHealth partner with the City with regard to a <br />downtown review and if the hospital was unwilling to do so, staff time and resources should be <br />weighed. Mr. Meisner believed the executive summary provided by the traffic consultant severely <br />underestimated the impacts and costs of remedies with regard to a site outside of the downtown <br />area. <br />Ms. Nathanson stated she did not believe Eugene voters would likely approve a bond measure to <br />assist PeaceHealth in an expansion of a downtown site. She also stated she did not believe any <br />of the fees should be waived. Ms. Nathanson pointed out that the north Eugene location would <br />be a significantly different project than what people may have assumed from looking at a <br />refinement plan and that she favored a Coburg orientation rather than a Crescent orientation. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nathanson, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved to amend the motion by <br /> deleting items 2, 3, and 6 as stated above. <br /> <br />MINUTES- City Council Work Session August 8, 2001 <br /> <br /> <br />