Laserfiche WebLink
commercial or industrial street; the developer could build a private street under certain <br />circumstances. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 asked about the utility easement on the site. Mr. Bj0rklund identified it as a usable <br />sanitary sewer line. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson asked if the City could take action contingent on action by another agency such <br />as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Mr. Klein said it would be possible, but it would <br />require adopting additional plan policies with the County's concurrence. Alternatively, should the <br />contingencies come forth, the property owner could request a plan amendment. Mr. Bj0rklund <br />noted that the State rules for wetlands protection might not allow the City to take such a <br />contingent action. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lee moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor to direct staff to prepare findings <br /> consistent with Option 1. The motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Farr and Mr. Pap8 <br /> voting no. <br /> <br />Ms. Childs noted that Option 1 was reflected in the ordinance that went to the public hearing. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly clarified, for the record, that the intent of the findings prepared for the City View site was <br />to protect the entire site. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lee moved, seconded by Ms. Taylor, to prepare findings consistent with <br /> Option 2 for the Davidson and Murray sites in the various site ordinances. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 asked if the staff recommendation addressed the testimony received. Mr. Bj0rklund <br />said yes. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson referred to the Murray property and the reference to groundwater contamination <br />on page 66 of the meeting packet. Mr. Bj0rklund clarified that the recommendation for <br />development was not based on the suitabilility of the site for stormwater treatment, but whether <br />the site could be protected in perpetuity. The BLM was unable to acquire the property because <br />of the groundwater contamination. The plan criterion was designed specifically to address such <br />a situation. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson referred to page 67 of the meeting packet and asked Mr. Bj0rklund to discuss the <br />staff recommendation for the Davidson site. Mr. Bj0rklund said that because of the amount of <br />impervious surface, much of the site was exempt from the buffer regulation, making it difficult to <br />protect the site; development on the remainder of the site would probably cut the pond turtles off <br />from their breeding areas. He added that pond turtles were easier to move than plants. <br /> <br /> The motion passed 7:1; Mr. Rayor voting no. <br /> <br />C.Work Session: TransPlan <br /> <br />Tom Schwetz of Lane Council of Governments, TransPlan Project Manager, provided an <br />overview of proposed TransPlan Alternative Performance Measures designed to comply with the <br />State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) (meeting packet page 92). He emphasized that the <br />process was new and had not been tested, but he anticipated that the local metropolitan planning <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 10, 2000 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />