Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
In response to a question from Mr. Lee about the impact of delaying council action, Mr. Piercy <br />said the district had a fairly "tight and aggressive" schedule but it could absorb about a month's <br />delay without jeopardizing completion scheduled for August 1, 2000. <br /> <br />Ms. Andersen reviewed the changes generated by this evening's discussion as follows: <br />· Page 1, paragraph 2: clarify the City's participation and the elements of the youth sports <br /> complex that will be the City's contribution to the project. <br />· Page 2: delete the term "initial" as it applies to investment. <br />· Identify a roster of fields (softball, baseball, football, soccer) developed through the final design <br /> process and incorporate the schedule into the agreement. <br />· Clarify areas that will be covered by charges under Rental Rates. <br />· Page 3: clarify and describe behaviors that would trigger the need for the school district to <br /> restrict access. <br />· Maximize community use of the facilities. <br />· Clarify spring and fall schedules (evening availability). <br />· Eliminate north/west references in describing the location for the Sheldon facility. <br />· Extend the term of the agreement to 30 years, with difficult outs in 10 and 20 years. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor said she could not support the motion unless a public hearing was held. <br /> <br /> The motion passed, 5:2; with Mr. Kelly and Ms. Taylor voting in opposition. <br />Mr. Farr left the meeting. <br /> <br /> III. WORK SESSION: REVIEW OF THE TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE <br /> <br />Mark Snyder, Urban Forester, Public Works, provided a ten-minute Powerpoint presentation on <br />the Tree Preservation Ordinance and an overview of the Urban Forest Management Plan. Mr. <br />Snyder said that one of the main questions for the council was: Given the goals established by <br />the Urban Forest Management Plan, are current regulations and programs effective in <br />implementing these goals? <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that one of the community goals he most often heard was to minimize the loss of <br />trees on both public and private land when reasonable alternatives exist. He commented that <br />since its implementation of the plan in 1992, there had been good progress on public lands but <br />not on private lands. Mr. Kelly expressed appreciation for the work of the Tree Foundation, <br />particularly its research on tree ordinances from around the country that revealed that Eugene's <br />was one of the weakest among those studied. He asked staff to review the enforcement aspect <br />of the current ordinance. <br /> <br /> Mr. Kelly moved, seconded by Taylor, that the council direct staff to draft a <br /> revised tree ordinance that addresses the seven areas described in the <br /> Eugene Tree Foundation recommendations; and that a work session and <br /> tentative public hearing on the ordinance be scheduled to occur before year's <br /> end. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said a departmental advisory committee (DAC) was unnecessary given the amount of <br />information already available. <br /> <br />Minutes--Eugene City Council August 9, 1999 Page 4 <br /> 5:30 p.m. <br /> <br /> <br />