CC Minutes - 07/27/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman said asset mapping was a broader tool than the residential density target, which took into account looking at the community and determining where the City had opportunities to achieve a broad range of different strategies such as looking to the future at the Willard School, the Lane County Fair- grounds, and Civic Stadium and determining what was needed and what opportunities existed. If the inventory or mapping were done ahead of time, it would be easier to plan. It will be a component of looking at MUCs. Mr. Papé thanked the Planning Commission for its work, noting that year in and year out, the commission was the hardest working body of volunteers in the City, eclipsed only by the Police Commission during the past six months. He expressed appreciation for the collaborative effort in which the commission had engaged, noting that the elimination of overlay zones brought more citizens to the table to work on their particular areas. He thought the CAHFN had done a model job in working with the Planning Commission and City Council. th Mr. Papé reviewed the upcoming MUC area studies, and asked what was going on with 29 Avenue and Willamette Street area. Principal Planner Kurt Yeiter said that area had not qualified for the TGM grant funding from the State of Oregon because it was not located on a State highway. Currently there was no funding, and all of the staff resources were focused on other projects listed on the priority list. Mr. Papé asked why River Road/Rasor Park MUC was moved up on the priority list when an area that had th intensity and visibility around it, like 29Avenue and Willamette Street, did not get attention. Mr. Yeiter said the word from the State was that River Road was promising. Since River Road was an old territorial th highway, it was a State problem the City had inherited. The State had turned down 29 and Willamette at least twice in the past. Another option for the South Willamette area was transportation issues. If buses were rerouted or the number of through lanes for automobiles was reduced, there would be spillover onto other north-south arterials. A broader, area wide transportation study had been on the wish list for a long time, and staff continued to look for opportunities with the Public Works Department. It remained an expensive item. Mr. Papé said funding sometimes led priorities. There was a lot going on in the River Road/Santa Clara transition area and he was not sure it needed to be second on the MUC list. He regretted that the council had changed the City’s Goal 5 direction. Ms. Muir said staff was in the early phases of trying to understand what kinds of work and resources would be required for Phase 2 of Goal 5. It meant there would be fewer resources for outreach, education and implementation. Mr. Papé also regretted the direction the council was taking on the alternative path project. He concurred with Mr. Kelly’s comments on alternative path and suggested establishing a timeline for the project. Ms. Muir said there would be a strict timeline if a technical assistance grant was received. Ms. Taylor said she was happy with the change in the Goal 5 direction. She asked when Item 42, one of the most important things that was listed would be addressed, noting it had been a higher priority in the past. Ms. Muir said a timeline for those items listed under “Other” had not been developed. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Ms. Muir said the civic center was listed as an emerging issues as part of the council priority for a new city hall and civic center. City Manager Taylor added it was tied to the council’s goal around City facilities in the downtown area. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 27, 2005 Page 5 Work Session