Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Mr. Clark, noted that the City’s currently available supply of both residential and employment land would potentially be affected by infill compatibility standards reviews. Ms. Gardner anticipated that final recommendations regarding the infill compatibility standards would be presented to the council in November or December of 2009. Ms. Gardner, responding to a question from Mr. Clark, noted that PSU population statistics recently adopted by Lane County had been used in the City’s ECLA process rather than “safe harbor” population statistics and that the joint elected officials from Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County would be holding a public hearing on September 21 to discuss population statistics relating to land development in greater detail. Deputy City Attorney Emily Jerome commented that safe harbor population figures were used in the absence of any coordinated population forecasts from Lane County Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Mr. Clark, noted that the number of bedrooms in residential dwellings had not been incorporated into the statistical analysis of the residential development land needs but did not rule out the use of such data as the ECLA process progressed. Mr. Clark asked if the staff presentations to the council regarding the ECLA process in September would include any discussion of restrictions placed on particular parcels of land. Mr. Dedrick answered that staff would be presenting further information on committed and protected lands which were considered separate from developable lands. Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka, noted that further information regarding the infill compatibility standards could potentially affect some of the baseline assumptions of the ECLA process. Mr. Zelenka maintained that it might make more sense to initially assume flat employment growth with respect to the ECLA process rather than the 1.4% listed in the ECLA: Baseline Assumptions report. Ms. Taylor hoped staff would continue to consider the City’s sustainability goals and policies with respect to the land needs specified in the ECLA process and further hoped that staff would work to include input from the community advisory committee. Ms. Taylor hoped staff might also consider supply-side issues related to residential redevelopment lands. Mr. Dedrick responded that such analysis would be highly speculative in that it would need to consider how much redevelopment might occur in a given area. Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, noted that staff was requesting council to accept the information included in the ECONorthwest report included in the agenda item summary as the baseline assumptions for further investigations into the City’s land needs. Ms. Taylor noted that she would like to see a minority report to counter the ECONorthwest report and felt that the community advisory committee had been too heavily weighted with members of the business and land development community. Mr. Dedrick, responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, noted that staff was not necessarily seeking a formal adoption of the ECONorthwest report from the council but rather an indication as to whether or not the staff’s interpretation of the findings of the report seemed reasonable. MINUTES—Eugene City Council July 22, 2009 Page 4 Work Session