Item 2A: Approval of Tentative Working Agenda

Home Browse Search

commissioners wanted to do things right. Mr. Mills said that as the newest commissioner, he frequently referred to the policies to try to link what he was reviewing to those policies. He found the policies very useful. Mr. Zelenka expressed appreciation for the commission’s willingness to meet jointly with the Sustainability Commission given the connections between those bodies’ work. Mr. Zelenka cited as most important to him, the commission’s work on the infill compatibility standards, opportunity siting, mixed-use centers because of the importance of the Walnut Mixed Use Center to his neighborhood, and the strategic neighborhood plans. Ms. Taylor agreed that completion of the infill compatibility standards were an urgent matter. While work on the standards were in progress, things were happening that were not good for neighborhoods, particularly in the South University Neighborhood. She thought everyone should be concerned about that neighborhood. Ms. Taylor was very interested in tree protection but it had been dropped off the commission’s work plan. She recalled that the City passed a strong ordinance that was remanded by LUBA in 2001, but nothing had been done subsequently to address the issue. She believed that old trees were very important to sustainabili- ty because of their contribution to air quality, and indicated she planned to offer a motion to move work on the remand to the top of the commission’s work plan. In response, Ms. Gardner said that portions of the ordinance referred to by Ms. Taylor were implemented in different ways. She said the council had not ranked the item highly and it was dropped. She suggested staff provide the council with a memorandum regarding existing tree protections. Ms. Taylor asserted that the community’s old trees were being sequentially logged given that people could remove five trees a year. She said that young trees do not serve the same purpose as old trees. Old trees were not replaceable and many in the community were concerned about that. Ms. Taylor asked about the status of height standards. Ms. Jerome indicated the height standards in place before the adoption of the minor code amendments were in place now. The Infill Compatibility Standards Project had produced a recommendation for height restrictions that the council would discuss in October. The minor code amendments remand had also been scheduled for council discussion. Responding to a follow-up question from Ms. Taylor, Ms. Jerome confirmed that the council could always take action on an ordinance with an emergency clause. Mr. Pryor acknowledged the difficult tasks faced by the commission. He was not inclined to make any changes to the work plan. He thought the commission had based its work plan on a well considered assessment of what it thought could and needed to be done. He acknowledged the conflicts in the growth management policies mentioned by the Mayor and termed those the ‘whack a mole’ aspect of the commis- sion’s work. He thought it was time the council revisited the policies to clarify them and ensure that the commission and staff stayed focused. He recommended that work be done with the assistance of the Planning Commission. While Ms. Ortiz supported the work plan presented to the council, she said it appeared the commission was focusing on the core urban areas of the community and she challenged it to pay attention to the outskirts of the community as well and involve those neighborhood groups in the work it did. Ms. Ortiz mentioned that the Active Bethel Citizens and the Trainsong Neighbors had discussed attempting to do something around the Highway 99 corridor, but she did not think that effort had made progress. She hoped to get that effort back on track, and suggested it was important both to plan for what one wanted and what one did not want. She did not think the area around Highway 99 had been given enough attention. MINUTES—City Council September 9, 2009 Page 3