Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Meisner expressed frustration that the committee did not address the north downtown area, <br />ignoring the srd/4th connector, leaving open the possibility of undesired development buffering the <br />downtown area and blocking the view of Skinner Butte. <br /> <br />Referring to a letter the council received from Sandra Bishop and Dorothy Anderson of the <br />Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB), distributed to councilors prior to the meeting, Mr. <br />Meisner said that the committee had an extensive discussion of the need for partnership and the <br />concept that EWEB's master plan should consider factors beyond cost. He expressed <br />disappointment about the letter's statement that no facilities would be moved because of the <br />cost. Mr. Meisner said he felt betrayed and was angry at the letter. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said he had liked the consultants. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor distributed some changes he was suggesting to the report focusing on access to <br />downtown and capturing some elements that he did not think were now in the report. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said that he had not shared many of the key issues identified by members. He did not <br />think the vote on the committee represented anything outside the views of the downtown <br />stakeholders, special interests, and elected officials, and questioned how the remainder of the <br />community would consider that fact. He believed many of the committee's recommendations <br />were less a framework for the future than implementation steps. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly thought some of the work done by the committee was great. He thought it appropriate <br />to accept the report, but acceptance did not mean the council endorsed any particular <br />recommendation in the report. Mr. Kelly said there needed to be a step inserted between "accept <br />report" and "come up with work plans on key next steps." He suggested the council have a work <br />session or, ideally, extended workshop dedicated to review of the report so the council could <br />discuss and reach concurrence on its elements. At the inception of Phase 2, the council could <br />add some steps, test those with the public, followed by development of a detailed work plan. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly did not want to print the report in final form unless the council's direction was captured <br />in the introduction to make clear the context in which it was accepted. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ thanked the committee and the councilors who participated on it. He said he <br />appreciated the first priority on the list related to opening the streets. He also liked Mr. Rayor's <br />suggested changes. Mr. Pap~ noted the use of University of Oregon Architecture students during <br />the process and encouraged the continued involvement of the University's School of <br />Architecture. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman also thanked the councilors who participated in the ad hoc committee. She <br />concurred with Mr. Kelly's remarks about the process after this point. She thought the document <br />had a lot of good ideas and some ideas she did not think were so good. Ms. Bettman also <br />thought there were a lot of ideas not in the document and hoped it had more exposure in the <br />community so such ideas were added. She was willing to accept the report as it reflected the <br />priorities of the committee, but she did not want its recommendations to be binding on the <br />council, or the council's acceptance of the report to be interpreted as tacit endorsement of the <br />recommendations. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 15, 2000 Page 4 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />