Laserfiche WebLink
Responding to a question from Mr. Brown about the price differential between the south and north parcels, <br />Mr. Björklund said he had not reviewed the appraisal in detail, and speculated the price difference was based <br />on the property’s proximity to Lane Community College and the potential the land could be used for <br />residential development. Mr. Brown asked how the property’s F-1 (Non-impacted Forest Lands) zoning <br />status affected that potential. Mr. Björklund believed it was possible the property could be rezoned. Mr. <br />Brown asked how much Lane County was collecting in taxes from the property owner. Mr. Björklund did <br />not know. <br /> <br />Mr. Brown expressed concern that if the City bought the land and took it off the tax rolls, it would <br />negatively impact Lane County government. He suggested the property was also a candidate for inclusion in <br />an expanded urban growth boundary (UGB). He was concerned about removing the property from that <br />discussion without more analysis. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor believed the City could purchase the property and still have money left over for a community park <br />in Santa Clara. He said the question was whether the purchase was a worthwhile investment. He did not <br />know but thought the acquisition was worth examining at the proposed price. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka agreed the purchase was a good deal and suggested the council also needed to think about what <br />would happen to the land if the City did not buy it. He agreed with Mr. Clark about the need for a <br />community park in Santa Clara and the importance of reserving money for that purpose. Mr. Zelenka also <br />noted the City had committed to the acquisition of several neighborhood parks through the POS measure. <br />Mr. Björklund indicated that goal had been the most challenging to achieve. The City sought out four-acre <br />sites with good street access owned by a willing seller, and to date had found no sites meeting those criteria, <br />forcing staff to consider smaller sites. He said the City had acquired one neighborhood park of about an <br />acre in size. Mr. Björklund anticipated the City would start to purchase lots with houses on them to <br />combine for a park in the future. He was unsure the City would ever be able to get neighborhood parks in <br />all the areas identified in the materials associated with the POS measure. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka speculated it would take decades to achieve the POS measure’s goal for neighborhood parks. <br />He suggested the tradeoff before the council was the goal for neighborhood parks, which could take a long <br />time to achieve, and the proposed land purchase. <br /> <br />At the request of Mr. Zelenka, Mr. Björklund reviewed the council’s options regarding the City’s naming <br />policy. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka expressed concern about the long-term maintenance cost of the parcel in question and <br />determined from Mr. Zelenka that no endowment accompanied the property. Mr. Björklund referred the <br />council to the meeting packet, which included projected maintenance costs based on different development <br />scenarios that ranged from $127,000 to more than $900,000 annually. <br /> <br />Mr. Poling pointed out that the bond identified south Eugene as an area eligible for bond funding and given <br />the property’s location in south Eugene, he did not think purchasing the property would be a misuse of the <br />funds. <br /> <br />Speaking to the naming policy, Mr. Poling noted the many charitable and community activities that Suzanne <br />Arlie was involved with. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—City Council November 8, 2010 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />