Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Jerome expressed that while it was unfortunate that the provisions of HB 3337 did not appear to allow for <br />various policy decision scenarios to be incorporated as part of the ECLA product, it might be possible to apply <br />scenarios in the future. <br />Mr. Brown stated he had reviewed a letter from two CAC members who were concerned with the data and <br />methodologies used in the ECLA process and further stated that he shared those concerns. Mr. Brown believed <br />that the data and methodologies used were unreliable and believed that their continued use could ultimately result <br />in lawsuits directed toward the City's land use policies. <br />Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to direct the City Manager to provide a thorough, <br />detailed response to the concerns raised in the letter and email to council by two CAC members <br />regarding ECLA's methodology and data. <br />Ms. Piercy asked for staff responses to the concerns of the CAC members. Mr. Dedrick affirmed that those <br />concerns had regarded the treatment of areas designated as mixed-use with residential development in commercial <br />zones. Mr. Dedrick commented that the data regarding those areas was still being collected and that a full <br />analysis had not yet been completed or presented to the council. Mr. Dedrick further commented that the State <br />guidelines regarding mixed-use areas were not entirely clear but that staff was working to determine the most <br />prudent course of action. <br />Mr. Dedrick maintained that it was sometimes difficult to maintain certain levels of precision with respect to the <br />data being collected on mixed-use land areas, but that he had the utmost confidence in the abilities of the staff and <br />consultant teams charged with collecting and analyzing the data. <br />Mr. Dedrick believed staff could indeed respond to the concerns raised in the CAC letter as referenced in Mr. <br />Brown's motion but suggested it would need to be made expressly clear what land areas and what data elements <br />were being called into question. <br />Ms. Piercy asked Mr. Brown which land areas and what data elements his motion and the CAC letters were <br />referring to. Mr. Brown answered that those elements had been described in CAC member Paul Conte's letter to <br />the council. He stated that there were most likely similar concerns from other CAC members but could not speak <br />specifically to any such concerns. <br />Mr. Clark noted a memorandum from CAC member Bill Kloos had also been circulated that had raised general <br />questions regarding the reliability of the data and methodologies used in the ECLA process. Mr. Clark added he <br />wanted to hear staff's responses to Mr. Kloos' concerns as well and asked Mr. Brown to accept a friendly <br />amendment to his previously stated motion that would allow Mr. Kloos' concerns to be addressed. <br />Mr. Clark offered a friendly amendment to Mr. Brown's previously stated motion and asked that <br />the word "two" be removed from said motion. Mr. Brown accepted the friendly amendment with <br />the consent of the second. <br />Mr. Clark offered a friendly amendment to the previously stated and amended motion to <br />additionally direct staff to return to the council in October 2009, with a specific timeline for <br />adoption of the ECLA findings. Mr. Brown did not accept Mr. Clark's friendly amendment. <br />Mr. Brown stated that although he agreed that a timeline needed to be formalized regarding adoption of the ECLA <br />findings he would not accept Mr. Clark's friendly amendment regarding the same. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council September 28, 2009 Page 8 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />