Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Meisner said he has been working with Marsha Miller on comparing system development <br />charges (SDCs) throughout the state. He noted that Eugene's SDCs were lower than many other <br />communities, including the City of Springfield. For that reason, he said, he would be hesitant to <br />support a Level A priority. <br /> <br />Goal: Healthy Natural and Built Environment <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor asked to add a 7th item to the work plan under Level A, executive order requiring <br />permits. <br /> <br />Mr. Johnson summarized Mr. Rayor's suggestion as follows: "Administrative order directing the <br />department directors of Public Works and Planning and Development to comply with all <br />applicable local, State, and Federal laws as either projects or land development occurs by the <br />City of Eugene." Referring the council to the action priority for a revised tree ordinance, Mr. <br />Rayor said it was an issue that could not be addressed without bringing in the planned unit <br />development (PUD) process. Mr. Johnson said staff needed council direction on how it wished to <br />make changes, noting that Items 2 through 7 were on-hold until Item 1, a work session on the <br />current ordinance, was held. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner expressed concern with the time line and thought that public anxiety over the issue <br />would not be assuaged by having a departmental advisory committee (DAC). He said the DAC <br />process would likely extend the time line and raise the level of anxiety in so doing. Mr. Kelly <br />echoed Mr. Meisner's comments. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ expressed concern about including the tree ordinance in the LUCU process and thus <br />delaying that project. Mr. Meisner said at the same time, whatever recommendation the council <br />made needed to be reviewed by the Planning Commission to make sure it was consistent with its <br />charge at the time. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart said that by eliminating the DAC process, the council narrowed the views because public <br />hearing testimony was usually provided by the same people. Mr. Johnson suggested the council <br />decide on item 1, which would clarify the issue for the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Rayor said he wanted to make sure that the PUD process was not exempt from the tree <br />ordinance, which was currently the case. Mr. Farmer noted that staff has already started <br />discussing the correlation between the PUD process and the tree ordinance. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said he was disappointed at not seeing any items under Level A under the Action <br />Priority: Review Downtown Plan, revise or adopt new plan and boundaries, siting the impetus of <br />the North End Scoping Group and the Downtown Summit. He asked the council to take <br />advantage of the momentum built by these two projects. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ suggested adding Level C: Buying and renovating the train station. Mayor Torrey said <br />that recent legislative action forced the City to address the train station issue. <br />Mr. Rayor suggested the following Item for Level A: Monitor the changes as tenants move into <br />the Broadway Plaza building. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner pointed out that Item 1 under Level B was ongoing and more appropriate as a Level <br />A item. Mr. Farmer agreed the item could be moved to Level A, although resources have been <br /> <br />Minutes--Eugene City Council July 26, 1999 Page 3 <br /> 5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />