Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mayor Piercy pointed out to Mr. Brown that staff was presenting the work of the CRG and the results of community input to the council. The council would make the final decisions about the plan. Mr. Zelenka shared Mr. Brown’s concerns and suggested that the document be revised to reflect that “up to” 400-500 acres would be needed. He agreed that more council discussion was needed before it made such a bold policy statement. Mr. Zelenka also wanted to hear more about the proposed revision related to UGB expansion for housing development. He thought Mr. Clark made a good point about the need for supporting commercial development but questioned the relationship of that expansion to the commercial lands inventory, as he interpreted such an action as creating an immediate surplus of commercial land. Mr. Zelenka said the reference to “energy price uncertainty” in Strategy 3 of the Climate & Energy pillar was more appropriately phrased as “energy price volatility and variability.” In addition, the phrasing of the strategy made it appear that it referred to climate change uncertainty. Mr. Zelenka said climate change was certain and the City had done considerable work on the topic. He asked for the text to be revised and indicated that otherwise he would have a difficult time supporting the other revisions. Mayor Piercy reiterated her previous point about the fact the council was reviewing the work of the CRG and the public, and until the council reached a decision point she believed the text needed to be sufficiently inclusive to accommodate those points of view. However, she believed that it would be appropriate to use the phrase “up to” as suggested by Mr. Zelenka. Mr. Clark pointed out that the CRG had also discussed a larger number. Mayor Piercy indicated she was attempting to reach a compromise position. Mr. Farr advocated against revising the document at this point. Responding to a question from Mr. Farr, Mr. Duncan described the methodology being used by the TRG to determine the capacity that existed in the form of large lots currently developed with a single-family house. That included an examination of all lots over three acres in size using aerial maps. It was possible the TRG would recommend that the City include some of that acreage in the inventory of residential land. Mr. Farr pointed out that many property owners would not develop their land beyond its current status. He wanted assurance that what was identified as available land inside the UGB was really available, and did not just look available. Mr. Duncan indicated that the TRG was also working to determine why lots were partially developed. Mr. Farr pointed out that some people owned large lots because they did not want a close-by neighbor. Speaking to the concerns voiced by Mr. Brown and Mr. Zelenka, Ms. Gardner recommended that the council postpone action at this time. The staff would continue to dialogue with the community and would return to the council periodically to share that input. She reiterated the mayor’s point that the final framework would be established by the council. Mr. Pryor suggested the discomfort felt by councilors was based on the fact people were trying to gauge their intentions. He agreed that the council did not need to act at this time. Mr. Clark advised Planning Division staff to ensure that it realistically managed the expectations of River Road/Santa Clara residents. He believed those residents wanted the transition plan to be codified so it had “teeth” to protect neighborhood livability. That was different from including the goals in the plan and hoping they were achieved. Mr. Clark expressed concern that the percentage shift in the mix of single-family and multi-family would result in leapfrog sprawl. He called for more conversation about that topic. MINUTES—Eugene City Council May 25, 2011 Page 3 Work Session