Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Bowers emphasized that it was important to have someone with authority to act when a <br /> citizen had a problem with zoning. <br /> <br /> Mr. Prichard noted that when the zoning code was updated, the definitions were not, which <br /> caused problems. <br /> <br />Mr. Prichard said the community should not be looking to Portland for answers because Portland <br />was a large community that could be restrictive and proscriptive in ways Eugene could not. He <br />said Eugene residents constantly tried to adapt the ideas of larger communities, such as nodal <br />development, which he termed a "disaster." It was a concept drawn from vital urban areas and <br />Eugene was attempting to adapt it to suburbia. It was not going to work in the short-term. <br /> <br />Mr. Forbes asked the presenters to comment on land availability and the urban growth boundary. <br />He said the boundary was intended to contain growth but it. had the result of increasing housing <br />prices to the degree that it forced low-income people out of the community to other nearby <br />communities to live, which caused vehicle miles traveled to go up. Mr. Prichard believed the <br />boundary was working well. The community was just now beginning to push up against the <br />boundary and feel its effects. He thought it the only thing that Separated Oregon communities <br />from communities in other states. Mr. Obie concurred.' He though the boundary was a <br />"bogeyman" for those who thought a larger UGB would create more opportunity. He did not <br />share that belief. He thought the boundary contributed to the environment and community <br />livability. <br /> <br />Mr. Obie supported Mr. Bowers' comments about the importance of the Business Assistance <br />Team, and suggested the committee offer the reestablishment of the team as a recommendation. <br />He believed the committee should also recommend a body modeled on the Portland <br />Development Commission. <br /> <br />Mr. Bowerman determined from Mr. Bowers that the C!ty of Portland had an alternative design <br />review path that allowed developers to avoid more proscriptive codes. Mr. Bowers said initially, <br />the development community feared it, but now embraced it. Mr. Prichard believed Eugene <br />should consider a similar approach. <br /> <br />Mr. Bowerman asked the presenters to discuss the agricultural sector as an economic <br />opportunity. He said agriculture was part of the area's common and economic history but the <br />sector was currently in distress. He said to the extent the community wanted to embrace and <br />protect the lifestyles of farmers and maintain the interaction between the urban and rural areas, it <br />seemed like an opportunity area. Mr. Johnson suggested the issue was an intergovernmental one. <br />The committee was charged by the mayor to develop an economic development plan for an <br />urban area, but obviously Eugene was part of a regional economy. He asked where the <br />leadership was at the Board of County Commissioners to positive impact those things mentioned <br />by Mr. Bowerman. He suggested the board was the more logical body to take such issues to, but <br />he did not see the leadership needed. Mr. Bowerman said he was not thinking so much about <br />protection, but about value added and manufacturing. The community lost its cannery rather <br /> <br />MINUTES--Mayor's Committee on Economic Development April 20, 2004 Page 10 <br /> <br /> <br />