Laserfiche WebLink
Johnson said that he was working with staff on an informational memorandum about the issue. <br />One option was for the council to amend the Land Use Code to allow the use in the C-1 zone. <br />Mayor Torrey added that he understood that C-2 land was available for the use but the property <br />owner found the land too expensive. He said that as land was consumed within the urban growth <br />boundary, such issues would continue to arise. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr agreed with Mr. Kelly that the council was working well together, and he suggested the <br />council had learned to collaborate, cooperate, and compromise on the issues it faced. He said <br />that if that continued, the council would continue to work well together. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner urged the council to be cautious in making changes in the Land Use Code in <br />response to the problems experienced by a single business because of the implications it had for <br />the larger community. He hoped that the council could figure out a way to mandate more efficient <br />use of the resource lands the community currently had, citing the land consumed by campus <br />industrial zoning as an example of his concerns. <br /> <br />Regarding BRT, Mr. Meisner noted that LTD staff had produced a new video tape showing BRT <br />using the guideway systems on the streets. He said it was remarkable to see, and he had <br />requested copies for the council to view. <br /> <br />Regarding the special response fee ordinance, Mr. Meisner pointed out that the ordinance was <br />written quite broadly and was not targeted at the University. He said that the issue was a <br />citywide issue, not a University issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson indicated that a public hearing on the special response fee ordinance could be <br />scheduled to accommodate the University's fall schedule. He asked if the council wanted the <br />ordinance reviewed by the Police Commission. Mr. Meisner said that the commission had <br />scheduled a retreat to discuss how to handle its work load given its heavy meeting schedule and <br />the many issues the commission was addressing. He said that the commission's schedule was <br />full until the retreat. Mr. Pap8 concurred with Mr. Meisner. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said that the after-school task force had discussed bringing Springfield into that <br />effort, and Springfield officials were supportive but reminded him that Springfield did not operate <br />a parks department. He had asked the City to approach the Willamalane Parks and Recreation <br />District about the effort. <br /> <br />2. Work Session and Action: Discussion of Police/Fire Survey Results <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson asked the council to comment on the results of the survey. He noted that the <br />council would discuss options for next steps at a work session on June 19. Council Coordinator <br />Kate Rowles distributed ward maps showing the voter turnout by ward and the percentage of <br />voters supporting the police and fire headquarters measure. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee observed that the issue did not appear to be of much importance to the public, but <br />nonetheless it was an important subject. He said that it was clear that location was a concern to <br />respondents. He wanted to move forward with another measure, preferably in November. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said the results reflected voters' confusion about the issues involved. He wanted a <br />quick space study to be performed before another measure was offered to the voters. He also <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 7, 2000 Page 3 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />