Laserfiche WebLink
Roll call vote; Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved that the council <br />adopt Council Bill 4914, an ordinance levying assessments for improvements to alleyes in <br />the West University neighborhood. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:2; councilors Tay- <br />lor and Bettman voting no. <br /> <br /> <br />6. ACTION: An Ordinance Repealing Resolution No. 4127 and the Eugene Parks and Recreation <br />Plan Adopted Therein; Amending Section 9.8010 of the Eugene Code, 1971; Repealing Section <br />9.9550 of that Code; and Adopting a Severability Clause <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon, seconded by Councilor Ortiz, moved that the City Council adopt <br />Council Bill 4914, an ordinance repealing the 1989 Eugene Parks and Recreation Plan. <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy called for comments on the motion. <br /> <br />Councilor Solomon objected to the lack of a project list in the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) <br />Comprehensive Plan, the impacts to the residential and commercial lands inventories, and said the action <br />should not be taken without consideration of that. She did not understand why the plan was on a fast track, <br />and said it appeared the City was attempting to avoid making a refinement to the Eugene-Springfield <br />Metropolitan General Area Plan (Metro Plan), “end-gaming” the Metro Plan. She said she would vote no on <br />the motion. <br /> <br />Councilor Pryor agreed with the need for a lands inventory, but he supported the PROS Plan with the <br />provision that there was still an “800-pound gorilla in the room,” that of the available land supply. He said <br />the council’s next tasks should be a review of the project list and an inventory of land. That would be a <br />crucial part of the discussion for him. <br /> <br />Councilor Papé said the decision was difficult for him. He appreciated the work of the advisory committee <br />that worked on the plan, which was a good product. He did not know what happened between that time and <br />the time the plan reached the council. He could not move ahead with a plan that called for the removal of <br />13,000 acres without affecting the buildable commercial, residential, and industrial lands supply. He <br />preferred to postpone action to a date certain to address those issues. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling determined from Mr. Lidz that in the absence of action on item 6, there was no plan. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling was also reluctant to support the motion and was reluctant to support the next motion as <br />well. The City proposed to remove property from an unknown buildable lands supply. He favored tabling <br />action to a time certain so the council could examine the lands supply and the residential lands supply <br />completed by the Lane Council of Governments. The fact that the projects list was removed from the plan <br />was a concern for him, and he noted an upcoming decision on the part of the State related to that topic that <br />would be rendered in eight days. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman supported both motions. Speaking to the issue of the land supply, she thought the City <br />could assume that most parks land to be acquired would be designated as either public or residential lands. <br />She said there were many variables affecting the residential land supply and that housing units were what <br />the community needed within a designated time frame to respond to growth, not necessarily acreage. She <br />suggested the issue of density was more relevant to the issue of how much growth the community could <br />accommodate than acreage. <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council February 13, 2006 Page 12 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br />