CC Minutes - 04/18/07 Work Session

Home Browse Search

UGB amendment. He said the only way to ensure that the acreage was replaced was to add the additional property before the acquisition was completed, as reflected in Mr. Poling’s motion. Mr. Poling said the two parcels that would be acquired through eminent domain represented a substantial amount of land and could not be removed without affecting the existing supply of buildable land. He believed there were valid reasons for taking action to acquire the property as discussed by Ms. Taylor. He was hesitant to use eminent domain; but this was a prime example of why it was occasionally necessary. He felt that if the City moved forward to acquire the property, it was essential to replace the acreage that would be removed from the buildable land supply. Ms. Solomon asked if the City was in negotiation with the property owners to acquire the land necessary to preserve the waterways. City Manager Taylor replied that negotiations with the owners had been going on for many years under the willing seller strategy. He said the City also examined a variety of strategies to engage partners to assist with funding. He said the use of eminent domain should be rare and when the City acquired property through condemnation, a source of funding should be identified. He said there was no source of funding for the subject parcels. Ms. Solomon asked if it was premature to abandon the willing seller strategy. City Manager Taylor said he had not seen the materials distributed to councilors or discussed the action with the Public Works director. Ms. Solomon objected to the process. She realized that councilors could place any motion on the table at any time, but there was virtually no prior notification and the action should have been the subject of a work session. She did not support eminent domain. She said the transaction was one that the Nature Conser- vancy would be interested in and that organization should work with nearby property owners to acquire the parcels. She was not interested in the City acquiring more property that would come off the tax rolls unless the City sold an equal amount of acreage elsewhere that it owned. Ms. Ortiz said she did not support Mr. Poling’s motion. She said the parcels were not buildable land and several requests to build on the properties had been denied; that was why Ms. Taylor’s motion was timely. She said the Green and Beverly properties had been discussed as long as she had been on the council and the information packet provided to the council consisted of materials that had been provided on earlier occasions. She said it was important for the City to protect those areas that it could and the fact that the property was accessible by the entire community, including by bus, was an asset. She would support Ms. Taylor’s motion. Mr. Clark supported Mr. Poling’s amendment and was also concerned about the process. He had been provided information only a short time before the meeting and, as a new councilor, did not have the advantage of earlier discussions and materials. He was uncomfortable being asked to act on something when he had virtually no exposure to information necessary to make an informed decision. Mr. Clark noted that he had proposed a motion six weeks earlier, which had as its purpose engaging the council in an honest discussion about the lands that should be protected and the lands that were buildable. He wanted a discussion instead of a fight, but the council decision was to wait until the State forced it to act. He said Ms. Bettman raised a point in that discussion that zoning and classifying certain lands for protection was premature because the City did not know what it intended to do in the future with that land and it was dishonest to reclassify it. He said the same argument applied in the current situation as future building technology might enable homes to be constructed on the R-1 land in a safe manner. He questioned stealing the value from the current owners and removing the property from the tax rolls when there might be a future MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 18, 2007 Page 2 Work Session