Laserfiche WebLink
The process would include the following steps: <br /> <br />? <br /> Asset Mapping <br />? <br /> Requirements Assessment <br />? <br /> Review Options and Techniques <br />? <br /> Decisions <br />? <br /> Implementation <br /> <br />Ms. Colbath said this process would allow the City to be flexible and react in a positive manner when <br />proposed developments, parks plans, or Goal 5 plans were presented, and allow for a more comprehensive <br />look at the proposed project. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé commended the Planning Commission for its work, and asked what resources were needed to <br />support the commission’s proposal. He wanted to assist staff in securing adequate resources and <br />technologies to move forward. Mr. Nystrom replied that staff was hoping to continue to evolve the <br />opportunity siting concept. He said more specific strategies would be developed following the council’s <br />direction today, and may result in requests in the FY07 budget. He added that staff would continue to move <br />forward with the current work program, determine where it needs to go in the future, and bring that back to <br />the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Lawless said that the Chambers Revisited project should not be looked at as a holistic study. He said <br />that the council could add resources to fill out the process that looked at one fine-grain component of how <br />infill and neighborhood quality can be measured, scoped, shaped, and evaluated in response to potential infill <br />projects. Chambers Revisited did not go to the next step to determine how additional density can be <br />achieved to get to the higher levels. Mr. Lawless said even old neighborhoods could absorb some density. <br />Although they may not be able to meet the entire target, they could contribute to a positive outcome rather <br />than degradation of both older residential and older commercial neighborhoods. Rigid interpretation of <br />planning rules produced broken components of the process. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor agreed with Mr. Papé, noting this was an interconnected series of discussions. He said the <br />Planning Commission helped the City Council by studying very complicated issues. He said greater <br />flexibility and creativity had helped the process. <br /> <br />Mr. Belcher said during his six years on the Planning Commission, it had never been found that the actions <br />of the commission had an effect on residential, commercial, or industrial lands, because it had looked at <br />everything in its own specific context. He said, in fact, there had been an impact on residential, commercial, <br />and industrial lands, and asked the council to direct the commission to return with a program that looked at <br />the big picture in a comprehensive manner to determine where the City was going with the 19 growth <br />management policies. <br /> <br />Mr. Carroll said it was true that the resources identified in the Chambers Reconsidered process were about <br />the neighborhood and compatibility, but those neighbors did put their feet on the ground and looked at <br />specific parcels within the mixed use center. He said when using the term opportunity siting, it was <br />important to remember for whom it was an opportunity. Neighbors could help with and have ownership of <br />the process by mapping assets. Keeping neighbors involved often and early was important. The opportunity <br />was in finding the overlap where neighborhood goals met development/investor and growth management <br />goals. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 16, 2005 Page 10 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />