My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC Minutes - 11/15/00 Work Session
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
2000
>
CC Minutes - 11/15/00 Work Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 10:32:34 AM
Creation date
8/1/2005 2:51:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Work Session
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/1/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Kelly indicated he would e-mail further thoughts to staff for discussion at the next work <br />session. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 referred to the federal courthouse and emphasized that its location in Eugene was not a <br />"done deal." He said that the courthouse could still be located in Springfield. He said that the <br />council should do what it could to encourage the General Services Administration to accept the <br />Chiquita site. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 shared Mr. Meisner's dismay at the letter from EWEB as it did not reflect his past <br />understanding of the issues involved. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that the City could pursue the cost-neutral strategies in the report and move <br />forward with them. She cited two-way streets as an example. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman said that the report did not address a concern of hers, the external considerations <br />for downtown, or how policies citywide affect downtown. She said that some of the existing <br />conditions downtown were a result of policy decisions made in the past, and she thought those <br />things the City could control, such as parking, should be reexamined. <br /> <br />In response to Ms. Bettman, Mr. Meisner noted that some committee members discussed the <br />issue she raised. He said he had made the committee aware of other processes through which <br />the City would address some of those factors involved, and the committee did not choose to <br />address it in the plan. <br /> <br />Also responding to Ms. Bettman, Ms. Nathanson thought the committee believed much of what <br />Ms. Bettman was concerned was more appropriately addressed in Phase 2 as implementation <br />strategies. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nathanson, seconded by Mr. Meisner, moved to thank the Ad hoc <br /> Committee on Greater Downtown Visioning for its excellent work and <br /> recommendations included in the report, A Vision for Greater Downtown <br /> Eugene; and to direct the City Manager to use the next appropriate council <br /> work session for continued discussion of the report and to present an outline <br /> of process for council and public involvement prior to council consideration of <br /> key next steps for Phase 2, to begin implementation of the vision for <br /> downtown. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 15, 2000 Page 6 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.