Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4914, an ordinance repealing the 1989 Eugene Parks and Recreation Plan. Mayor Piercy called for comments on the motion. Councilor Solomon objected to the lack of a project list in the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Comprehensive Plan, the impacts to the residential and commercial lands inventories, and said the action should not be taken without consideration of that. She did not understand why the plan was on a fast track, and said it appeared the City was attempting to avoid making a refinement to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan General Area Plan (Metro Plan), “end-gaming” the Metro Plan. She said she would vote no on the motion. Councilor Pryor agreed with the need for a lands inventory, but he supported the PROS Plan with the provision that there was still an “800-pound gorilla in the room,” that of the available land supply. He said the council’s next tasks should be a review of the project list and an inventory of land. That would be a crucial part of the discussion for him. Councilor Papé said the decision was difficult for him. He appreciated the work of the advisory committee that worked on the plan, which was a good product. He did not know what happened between that time and the time the plan reached the council. He could not move ahead with a plan that called for the removal of 13,000 acres without affecting the buildable commercial, residential, and industrial lands supply. He preferred to postpone action to a date certain to address those issues. Councilor Poling determined from Mr. Lidz that in the absence of action on item 6, there was no plan. Councilor Poling was also reluctant to support the motion and was reluctant to support the next motion as well. The City proposed to remove property from an unknown buildable lands supply. He favored tabling action to a time certain so the council could examine the lands supply and the residential lands supply completed by the Lane Council of Governments. The fact that the projects list was removed from the plan was a concern for him, and he noted an upcoming decision on the part of the State related to that topic that would be rendered in eight days. Councilor Bettman supported both motions. Speaking to the issue of the land supply, she thought the City could assume that most parks land to be acquired would be designated as either public or residential lands. She said there were variables to the residential land supply that regarded living units the community needed within a certain time to respond to growth as well as acres. She suggested the issue of density was more relevant to the issue of how much growth the community could accommodate than acreage. Councilor Bettman asserted that the same people “fighting for large buildable lots” and no maximum lot size were also arguing that the community needed more developable land within the urban growth boundary. She said if the City wanted to use its land supply more efficiently and accommodate more units it must address the density issue and maximum lot size. Councilor Kelly said the PROS plan was a plan of strategies. He asked those considering opposing the plan on account of the land supply issue to have the discussion in the context of the project list rather than the plan. Councilor Kelly noted a good point that was raised by Roxie Cuellar of the Lane County Homebuilders Association in her e-mail communication to the council. He had not realized that parks were an outright MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2006 Page 12 Regular Meeting