CC Minutes - 11/14/11 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Farr asked what it meant for a street to be transportation- constrained. Ms. Hansen said that referred to already congested areas where congestion would be worsened past acceptable levels by the addition of more residential development. It was possible the City could choose to accept a higher level of congestion. Mr. Farr was concerned that developable land would be left undeveloped because the City lacked the appropriate transportation infrastructure. He asked why the State mandated an examination of non - contiguous lands. Ms. Hansen said the State mandated that the City examine already developed nearby non - resource lands with the intent to preserve farm and forest lands. Staff had chosen the areas to be examined. City Attorney Emily Jerome clarified that staff had identified areas already acknowledged as developed and committed land by Lane County. There was little "wiggle room" in the State criteria governing what lands the City could look to because the examination was based on existing County zoning. Mayor Piercy suggested that the Oregon Department of Transportation's revision of its highway mobility standards would give the community more flexibility in regard to acceptable levels of congestion so the community could achieve the residential density the council wanted it to have. Mr. Brown said the Dillard area did not appear to be constrained by farmland or wetlands; it appeared the main constraint was the limitations of Dillard Road. Ms. Hansen said that was one constraint. Two other constraints regarded the provision of wastewater and stormwater service, which were problematic. Mr. Brown observed that most of the areas under consideration had traffic constraints and he believed the City would have to expand capacity in those areas. Mr. Brown asked staff to discuss Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) service issues. Ms. Hansen said EWEB staff was asked to review each area and determine if service could be provided. A number of factors went into that analysis, which was very preliminary at this time. Mr. Brown determined from Ms. Hansen that the some of the areas in question had service from EWEB or a water district but many of the developed lots had wells. Ms. Ortiz suggested it was possible to serve any area with enough money but she thought it was important to consider the impact of that on housing affordability. She appreciated the cautions staff offered about the Dillard area. She asked Ms. Hansen if staff had identified lands currently zoned for industrial purposes that could be used for other purposes. Ms. Hansen suggested the potential that industrially zoned land in the Awbrey Lane area and the area north of Lane Community College along Interstate 5 could be converted to other uses. Responding to a question from Mr. Clark, Ms. Hansen said the Envision Eugene process was occurring in coordination with the Transportation System Plan update and staff hoped that the council would adopt them at about the same time. If that could not happen, staff would recommend the council make amendments to TransPlan to reflect new projects and service levels in the interim. Mr. Clark asked if the City was legally required to have a transportation plan that could be funded within the 20 -year planning horizon to service the new areas brought inside the UGB. City Attorney Jerome said the City must demonstrate to the State that it could feasibly expect those lands to develop within the next 20 years. That evidence did not have to rise to the level of a project in the Capital Improvement Program. She indicated she would provide more specific information about the legal requirements related to transportation planning. Mr. Clark reiterated his desire that the lands identified for expansion could actually be developed. City Manager Ruiz emphasized his intent was to present the council with a realistic and achievable plan. MINUTES— Eugene City Council November 14, 2011 Page 2 Work Session