Laserfiche WebLink
She solicited comments and questions from the council. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Ms. Ortiz, Planner Ann Siegenthaler of the Planning Division indicated that the <br />ordinance before the council was very similar to ordinances the council had seen before the Lane County Local <br />Government Boundary Commission was abolished. She said that there was little change in how withdrawals from <br />special districts were processed except the council would see more withdrawals from such districts that used to be <br />automatic. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy said she received no e-mails or communications of concern, and determined that Planning Division <br />staff had received none. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark had received no comments. He determined from Ms. Siegenthaler that the ordinance would not materially <br />affect the River Road Parks and Recreation District effort to include Santa Clara in its boundaries. <br /> <br />III. PUBLIC HEARING: <br />th <br />An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of the Alley Right-of-Way Located between 10 Avenue and Broad- <br />way Parallel to Olive and Charnelton Streets for the Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Eugene <br />(VR1 09-01) <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. <br /> <br />Zachary Vishanoff <br />, no address given, said the notice of the hearing in the newspaper did not include the item and <br />encouraged the City to do more to let the public know that the hearings were happening. He was concerned that the <br />council was proposing to take action because he maintained that there was a need for a park across from the library <br />and downtown planning was broken. He urged the council to explain urban renewal to the public and the fact that <br />private developers would get the alley and explain that it was in the good of the community to hand it over to private <br />developers. He also called for an explanation of why action was not taken to develop a park across from the library. <br />He agreed with Eugene resident Otta Poticha that the Downtown Plan was not a plan but a “parking ticket.” He <br />termed the plan a “laundry list of characteristics.” <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing. She pointed out to Mr. Vishanoff that WG was working on a mixed use <br />development for the site in question that might include some open space. The council would consider that project on <br />April 8. <br /> <br />IV. PUBLIC HEARING: <br />An Ordinance Adopting Hazardous Substance User Fees for the Fiscal Year Commencing July 1, 2009 <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the hearing. She <br />solicited questions or comments from the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown noted the State per company cap on fees such as the City’s toxics right-to-know fee and determined from <br />Management Analyst Glen Potter of the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department that the City had several <br />companies that benefited from the cap. About half of the companies in the program enjoyed that benefit. Mr. Brown <br />asked if any of the companies had commented on the fee increase. Mr. Potter said he received no comments <br />regarding the fees. He noted that companies who were charged were represented on the Toxics Board. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy determined that Mr. Poling objected to taking action on the item at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka asked if the City would seek legislative action to change the cap imposed by the State legislature. Mr. <br />Potter said that the City’s legislative priorities included such a recommendation but the City had no success in <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—City Council February 17, 2009 Page 2 <br /> <br />