CCMinutes - 06/14/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ms. Taylor requested information about the cost of the project and the number of participants. Ms. Heinkel did not have an exact number of participants. Ms. Taylor expressed concern that a single participant from one small community was not representative of that community. She thought for all the county's communi- ties to reach agreement on their goals would take a very long time to accomplish. Ms. Taylor believed a logical outcome of the process could be that local agencies shared revenues and service responsibilities, but did not want to have a regional government if that was a goal of the process. Mr. Lowe said the issue of regional government was a question rather than a goal. Mayor Torrey thought the Region 2050 process an improvement over the Growth Management Study process because it involved other Lane County communities, and what Eugene did had an impact on those communities. He noted that the policy board was discussing strategies rather than policies. He thought the discussion was worthwhile given the interrelationships between communities and the impact that activities in one community had on its neighboring communities. As an example, he cited the potential for Junction City to allow different development patterns along Highway 99 than those Eugene preferred. He thought it best that Eugene and Junction City have an opportunity to discuss that issue. Mayor Torrey hoped the community got a better handle on its buildable lands inventory soon. Mayor Torrey said the region needed to find a way to help the smaller communities address their infrastruc- ture problems. Mr. Kelly, seconded by Mr. Pap~, moved to extend time for the item by ten minutes. The motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Mayor Torrey called for a second round of comments and questions. Mr. Kelly said he was also skeptical about the process but preferred to try it as opposed to not trying at all. He said he would not support the project if he thought it would circumvent local policies or laws. The policy board had not discussed the concept of a regional government, and he did not think there was support on the policy board for the idea. He believed the Region 2050 recommendations could only be realized if the local governments participating in the effort incorporated the recommendations into their local ordinances and planning documents. He acknowledged a failure on the part of one community to adopt the recommen- dations could be an issue. Speaking to a concern expressed earlier by Ms. Bettman, Mr. Kelly clarified that the scenarios accounted for development inside the UGBs in that an overall density inside each UGB was presumed in each scenario. Mr. Kelly agreed with Ms. Nathanson that the transportation system was a critical issue. He expressed concern to Ms. Heinkel about embarking on the public outreach effort without a substantive transportation model. Ms. Bettman agreed the dialogue was worthwhile, but questioned the cost of the process creating the dialogue. She also believed that cost of implementing the agreed-upon strategy for individual jurisdictions could be quite high. Ms. Bettman believed local governments had the tools they needed to ensure livability, and it was up to the individual jurisdictions to determine if that was what they wanted to do. She did not believe a voluntary program would be effective as there would be no enforcement mechanism to stop a development that the affected jurisdiction desired. Ms. Bettman further objected that each scenario enabled MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 14, 2004 Page 6 Work Session