Laserfiche WebLink
tems Development Charge Methodologies adopted by Resolutions Nos. 4740, 4748, <br />4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876, and 4883; and repealing Resolution <br />Nos. 4740, 4767, 4768, 4770, 4794, 4795, 4827, 4875, 4876, 4883. <br /> <br />City Manager Taylor stated that the resolution had been four years in the making. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka concurred with the methodology and the rationale for including the kindergarten through <br />grade 12 educational institutions in the residential class of Systems Development Charges (SDCs). It had <br />struck him as odd that it would not include all educational institutions in that class. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka moved to amend the note underneath Table 19 in the Methodology, per- <br />taining to Non-Residential Systems Development Charge classes for the Parks Systems De- <br />velopment Charges, to read as follows: <br /> “Note that, on the basis of the park user survey results educational institutions are not <br />included in non-residential classes , as users associated with educational institution are gen- <br />erally attributable to residential land uses, and related demand is accounted for in residential <br />development categories.” <br />The motion died for lack of a second. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark shared his concern that this would add a burden to those who would begin a sustainable <br />business in the city of Eugene. He felt the resolution would put people in a position wherein it would be <br />more advantageous to do business in Springfield. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman did not consider the addition of Systems Development Charges (SDCs) to be adding yet <br />another burden to development. She averred that the costs to add new development were there regardless of <br />who paid for them. She said the SDC methodology just determined who paid for it instead of shifting the <br />burden of that new development onto taxpayers and residents. She asserted that people often paid for <br />growth with diminished services and a diminished ability to pay for infrastructure. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to amend the resolution to delete <br />non-residential Systems Development Charge formulas. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon was not able to see a nexus for the formulas. She noted that the reasons people were for <br />or against the non-residential charge listed in the agenda packet suggested that the additional population of <br />employees, customers, and visitors and the associated increase in the population of park users increased the <br />demands for park capacity. She disagreed with this assertion. She said when she went to Cottage Grove or <br />Springfield it was not to go to the park. She thought a person might come to Eugene to attend a specific <br />festival at one of the parks, but this did not correlate to an increase in park usage by people who were in <br />Eugene for other reasons. <br /> <br />Councilor Clark agreed with Councilor Solomon. He observed that the City asked people to come and enjoy <br />the parks. He did not see it as an issue of business. <br /> <br />Councilor Zelenka opposed the amendment. He believed there was a nexus between non-residential <br />employees and customers and park usage. He averred that the increase in park usage had been documented <br />in a survey which had indicated that 16 percent of the park users were non-residents. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 9, 2007 Page 9 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />