Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 11/28/05 WS M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Work Session McNutt Room, City Hall November 28, 2005 5:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Poling, Jennifer Solomon, David Kelly, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Gary Papé, Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor. The Honorable Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the Eugene City Council to order. A. COMMITTEE REPORT AND ITEMS OF INTEREST FROM MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER Mayor Piercy reported that she met with representatives of the Federal Highway Administration and the Oregon Department of Transportation to discuss alternatives to the West Eugene Parkway. She shared that in the course of the conversation, the representatives were amenable to pursing alternatives within the Environmental Impact Statement and therefore a proposal to hire a consultant who would facilitate the process would be presented to the Metropolitan Policy Committee at its December 8 meeting. In conclusion, Mayor Piercy announced that the next Mayor’s “One-On-One” meeting would be held on Tuesday, November 29 in the Bethel neighborhood. Ms. Ortiz reported that she attended the following events: ? River Road/Santa Clara Task Force Outreach Program on Monday, November 21, where it was noted that the constituents were doing good work to identify the needs to retain the neighborhoods intact; ? Enterprise Zone meeting (with Mr. Pryor) and presented a request for additional funding for schools; ? Human Services Commission meeting (with Mr. Pryor), which included discussions on the Homeless Initiative and the Community Health Centers and how to incorporate the latter into the School-Based Health Centers. Mr. Kelly reported that he attended the recent Region 2050 meeting which included a discussion of policy and legal issues around an adopted regional growth strategy with Lane Shetterly, the director of the State of Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. He added that a staff team representing Region 2050 would meet the week of December 5 to discuss and craft a report on Mr. Shetterly’s information to be presented to the Region 2050 Policy Board in January. Mr. Kelly explained that part of the challenge for Region 2050 was the legal impact for a regional growth strategy, which falls under a State statute entitled Regional Problem-Solving. He noted that the statute was relatively new and therefore had no administrative rules and had been tested in only two Oregon communities. Mr. Kelly proceeded to request that the City Manager provide an update on the Cultural Services Compre- MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 1 Work Session hensive Plan. City Manager Taylor responded that a memorandum would be presented to the council outlining the status of the plan, which was targeted to begin early in 2006. Ms. Taylor reported that the Lane Regional Area Protection Authority received a grant from the Environ- mental Protection Agency to provide low-interest loans to truckers so they may do what was necessary to remain warm or cool, as the case may be, without idling their trucks during rest stops. She pointed out that the elimination of this practice would ensure unnecessary fuel usage and increase air quality. Mr. Papé reported that Mr. Poling, City Manager Dennis Taylor, Public Works Director Kurt Corey, and he met with representatives of Sheldon High School recently to discuss the parking issues at the school as well as access to Willagillespie Road. He requested that staff provide a status report on these issues which were impacting students. City Manager Taylor responded that a meeting was scheduled with Kurt Corey and George Russell, Superintendent of the 4J School District, to respond to the situation. Mr. Papé reported that he and Ms. Ortiz attended the River Road/Santa Clara Transition Team Meeting recently and said he was pleased with the progress of that volunteer group and that he looks forward to the transition. Mr. Papé said it was becoming clear that River Road and Santa Clara want to remain together for some of the recommendations and split on others, as applicable. Ms. Solomon announced that she would accompany Mayor Piercy to the Mayor’s “One on One” meeting on November 29 in the Bethel area. City Manager Taylor expressed special gratitude to City Manager's Office staff Mary Walston and Lynda Rose for the incredible effort they put forth during the recent short work week to ensure that the City Council received its cumbersome packet. Additionally, he drew the council’s attention to intended motions on the land use code that would be discussed at the regular City Council Meeting following the work session. B. WORK SESSION: PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN City Manager Taylor introduced Carolyn Weiss, Parks Planning Manager, who provided an overview of the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Weiss introduced the components of the plan via a PowerPoint presentation, which were outlined in the Agenda Item Summary and attachments. She highlighted the strategies as follows: Recreation ? Be adaptable to the change and needs of the community. ? Identify and develop new programs. ? Continue to provide a wide range of specialized services for people with disabilities and expansion of inclusion efforts. Parks ? Provide neighborhood parks within one-half mile of most residents and community parks within two miles of most residents. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 2 Work Session Natural Area ? Promote activity between natural areas through acquisition and development whenever feasible. ? Work with the appropriate government jurisdictions to explore feasibility of trail connections on lands outside Eugene’s urban growth boundary (UGB). Planning ? Continue to emphasize public safety and security in the design and operation of City parks, natural areas and facilities. Ms. Weiss spoke to the public outreach component since December 2004, which she reported included six public forums to gain feedback on the plan. Additionally, she reported that a meeting with the Mayor’s parks advisory committee was held in July 2005 to discuss some of the revisions noted in the plan. Ms. Weiss stated that a significant update was the addition of the Project and Priority Plan. She explained that this information was removed from the comprehensive plan as it needs to be adaptable and flexible and respond to the growth of the community and funding needs. Ms. Weiss further explained that the document would be adopted by council resolution, be subject to a public hearing, and following that process, would be included in the PROS Comprehensive Plan as an appendix. Ms. Weiss clarified that while the plan did include strategies which go beyond Eugene’s UGB, they were aspirational in nature and do not assume any authority over land in Lane County’s jurisdiction. She added that five strategies were revised to clarify that intent. Ms. Weiss spoke to the Eugene Planning Commission’s recommendation that the council approve the PROS Comprehensive Plan with seven amendments. Six of those amendments were incorporated into the revised plan. Ms. Weiss spoke to one proposed amendment that was not included in the plan: To include lands owned by the Bureau of Land Management which were purchased with land and water conservation fund dollars into the Parks and Open Space Inventory. Although this inclusion may show that the natural area of park target was met through the year 2025, other policies may require additional acquisitions within this park type. She explained that by adding the 742 acres into the City’s inventory, a false surplus of lands would be shown in the Natural Area Parks category through the year 2025. This was not consistent with input received from the public which indicated a desire for additional natural area parks. In conclusion, Ms. Weiss announced that a public hearing would be held on the plan on December 12 and following adoption, staff would present the Project and Priority List to the council in February for its review, followed by a public hearing on February 27, 2006. She added that the option of a bond measure would also be a discussion item for the council in mid-January 2006. Mayor Piercy called for council comments and questions. Mr. Kelly stated that Eugene had a superb parks and open space system and applauded staff, businesses, and residents, all of whom contributed to this accomplishment over many years. He pointed to the gaps which have been identified and included in the plan; additionally, a structure for the aspirations. Mr. Kelly then spoke to the complexity of the plan and questioned why it was proposed for adoption as a refinement to the Metro Plan. He pointed out that it did not look like a typical refinement plan and if adopted as a council resolution, concerns around land use legalities would be eliminated. City Attorney Glenn Klein replied that MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 3 Work Session the plan was recommended as a refinement plan, as it replaced the existing refinement plan. He concurred that much of the content of the plan was not of refinement plan language and conceded that legal counsel had not reviewed the document to ascertain if there was a requirement that some of the sections would be required to be included in a refinement plan. Mr. Kelly requested that counsel undertake an analysis of the document and report its findings to the council. He suggested that an ordinance to repeal the earlier policies, followed by an adoption of the new plan by resolution may be a more prudent process. Mr. Papé stated he was most impressed with the plan and expressed appreciation to staff and community members who contributed to its content. He questioned if there was intent to build on park system development charges (SDCs). Ms. Weiss replied there was no such intent and explained that once the Project and Priority List was adopted, that document would be the starting point to identify SDC projects which could be a “subset” of the larger project list. City Manager Taylor added that such processes would coincide with each other. Mr. Papé pointed out that the public had not been part of a discussion regarding SDCs. Mr. Papé then asked if other communities included parks and open space that may be owned by other jurisdictions inside their urban growth boundary. Ms. Weiss pointed to the examples of the Willamalane Parks and Recreation District and the City of Portland and said they did not include such lands that they did not own but may include facilities on such land. She added that National Recreation Parks Association (NRPA) did have standards in that regard at one time; however, such standards varied with each community and therefore it was too cumbersome a chore to administer. Ms. Weiss shared that analysis undertaken by staff revealed that Eugene fell somewhere in the middle of all communities with regard to its target-setters. Mr. Papé moved on to Page IV of the Executive Summary, Section B, Plan Highlights: Maintaining existing investments. He suggested there be some reference to future investments. Ms. Ortiz complimented the plan and asked that in its implementation, the plan be equitable for all community members. Mr. Pryor echoed comments expressed by others that the plan was well-crafted. However, he spoke to the refinement plan discussion that was raised by Mr. Kelly. He said the basic components were sound; however, he voiced a concern regarding specifics. Mr. Pryor pointed out that members of the community may be wary of a plan that committed itself without a complete vetting process. However, he conceded that the plan did allow the City adequate time to fully review the project list and that that process should be thorough and collaborative. Mr. Pryor noted that the project list would be assumed by the community as a starting point for bonding and opined that a full-scale bonding list would not be necessary if the City was thoughtful with regard to the project list. Ms. Bettman voiced her assumption that the plan would be aspirational. She pointed out that there were no policies in the plan as proposed, and if adopted, the policies in the existing plan would be eliminated. Ms. Bettman questioned how the plan can be a land use decision if there were no policies. She then asked that staff provide her with a copy of the existing plan so she could review the policies that would be eliminated. Ms. Bettman spoke to the SDC issue and pointed out that such SDCs were going to be tied to a project list rather than a level of service. She therefore questioned if the adopted project list would reflect a distinction between new capacity and filling the existing deficit of capacity and if the new capacity for new growth be allocated to the SDC and the balance put before a bond measure. Johnny Medlin, director of the Parks and Open Space Division, responded that following adoption, the project list would be a starting place for the SDC review committee, which could then craft a recommendation for a methodology that would come to the MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 4 Work Session council for adoption. He explained that his understanding of the Oregon Revised Statute was that the original project list must reflect both the capital costs and percent-eligible attributable to growth for each of the projects. Mr. Medlin said that the project list would include what potentially can be covered by SDCs as an ultimate and then staff would make a recommendation to the council to adopt the entire list, or a subset of the list. The council can then modify the list accordingly. In response to a question from Mayor Piercy, Ms. Weiss replied that staff had not returned to the Board of County Commissioners to discuss the above-noted amendment. Mayor Piercy questioned if the Urban Green Space, i.e.Downtown, had been preserved in the plan. Ms. Weiss replied that a park-type facility entitled Urban Plaza was included in the plan. Mayor Piercy questioned how such a space could be fully green as opposed to an area with plants, etc. She then pointed out there were varying urban parks and some have greater needs in terms of public safety and viability. She said they need to be a separate category in the plan to speak to these needs. In conclusion, Mayor Piercy spoke to Goal 9 on Page 15 of the plan, where it was concluded that parks were not part of economic development, and opined that providing a good park system was a very integral part of a model city and was certainly a key part of economic development. Ms. Taylor concurred with Mayor Piercy’s comment that parks were in fact part of economic development. She offered as an example the parks space that was built in Atlanta, Georgia, for the Olympics and pointed out that that addition revived the area with new businesses and apartment buildings. Ms. Taylor turned to Page VIII of the Executive Summary and pointed out that rivers and hills cannot be moved. Ms. Weiss responded that there were strategies to protect waterways, i.e., the Santa Clara Waterway and possibly some rural farmland parks in northern Eugene that were not fully developed with sports fields. Ms. Taylor believed that the natural areas should certainly be saved if at all possible. Ms. Taylor then referred to Page X of the Executive Summary: Management –Improve coordination between the Public Works and Library, Recreation, and Cultural Services Departments. She pointed out that “parks” was spread out over three divisions and opined that a separate Parks Department was needed in the City’s organizational structure. Renee Grube, Director of Recreational Services, stated that this issue had been an ongoing topic of discussion but it was not included as a strategy in the plan. Ms. Taylor asked that staff review this issue. Ms. Taylor turned to Page XII of the Executive Summary and said it was interesting idea to title “volunteering” as a recreational activity. Mr. Kelly spoke to Ms. Bettman’s concerns regarding policies and noted they were listed in the existing ordinance on pages 11 and 12. He agreed they were important policies; however, he opined that none of them would have any affect on land use decisions. Mr. Kelly then asked if staff could consider the idea of the council adopting the plan as a resolution rather than a refinement plan. City Manager Taylor stated that the City Attorney’s Office would review the procedures and consequences of such a course of action and advise the council of its findings on December 12. Mr. Kelly asked staff to provide page citations for the Planning Commission’s recommendations to the plan. He then turned to a strategy on page 54 of the plan – I-25. – Consider willingness of seller as a key criterion when prioritizing acquisition opportunities. He said he understands such a motivation; however, he suggested the wording be changed to: Consider willingness of seller as a criterion along with other goals and strategies in the plan. He cautioned that a high-value parcel could be immediately ignored if it did not have a willing seller. Mr. Papé turned to page XII of the Executive Summary – Provide community parks within two miles of most residents. He questioned if such a statement was realistic. Ms. Weiss replied that based on that MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 5 Work Session criteria, the City was only missing one community park which was located in the River Road/Santa Clara area and which staff continues to search for a suitable site. Mr. Papé turned to page XIII – Natural Areas – Prioritize natural resource acquisitions using criteria beyond natural resources to include opportunities for recreation, education, and protection of important visual resources. He asked for an explanation of that priority. Ms. Weiss replied that the inclusion of natural resources was not the only criterion and that recreation potential must also receive attention. Mr. Papé then pointed out that the Executive Summary states there were performance measures and page 71 states they would be developed. Ms. Weiss said she would follow up on that anomaly. Ms. Bettman stated she was reluctant to repeal the existing policies if there were no replacement policies. She questioned what legal weight the strategies would have with such a document. Mr. Klein responded that that point will be addressed by a memorandum to the council. Ms. Bettman then referred to the revisions to the strategies, in particular the strategy that the City had no authority outside the city limits. She asked for clarification. Ms. Weiss responded that the strategy Ms. Bettman referred to speaks to the City not having powers of condemnation outside the city limits. She added that a number of the revised strategies do stipulate that the City did not have authority on lands outside the UGB. Mr. Klein added that such authority was shared in the urban transition area and, therefore, council cannot unilaterally adopt a document in that area; rather, a new policy must be adopted by the City and Lane County. Ms. Solomon voiced a concern regarding the properties that were not in the inventory, such as those owned by other entities and particularly those in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wetlands. She pointed out that such exclusion distorts the data and could ultimately jeopardize the success of a ballot measure. Ms. Solomon then expressed her belief that the City should not be the sole provider of all the parks, recreation, and open space services and this plan stated as much. She opined that such a philosophy undermines opportunities for partnerships and could reduce incentives to bring forward creative ideas. Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to direct the City Manager to pro- ceed with the public hearing on the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehen- sive Plan on December 12, 2005, with adoption set for December 14, 2005. Mr. Poling stated that a monumental effort went into this project. However, he spoke to the short timeline to adopt the plan and said that based upon the comments made at this work session and those that would be made at the public hearing on December 12, perhaps it might be prudent to postpone the December 14 adoption date at the end of the public hearing. Mr. Papé agreed, and offered the following friendly amendment: Mr. Papé offered a friendly amendment, accepted by Mr. Poling and Ms. Solomon, to remove the December 14 adoption date from the process. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the majority of the council voiced concern over “special districts;” however, he noted that there were several paragraphs on page 69 of the plan that stipulated special districts as an option. He asked that that language be omitted from the plan as it can be discussed at a later time. Mr. Kelly further suggested that performance measures be reported to the City Council on an annual basis and noted in the plan accordingly. The motion, as amended, passed unanimously. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 6 Work Session C. WORK SESSION: CITY COUNCIL PRIORITY ISSUE – HOSPITAL UPDATE City Manager Taylor reported that he, Mayor Piercy, and Planning and Development Director Susan Muir met with representatives of McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center and the President of Triad Corporation on November 15, at which time the representatives announced a proposed Eugene site they selected for construction of a hospital. Additionally, he explained that they presented a list of issues and concerns for the City’s response, which was delivered on November 21 and included in the council packet. Ms. Muir referred to Attachment C of the Agenda Item Summary: a map of the potential hospital site. She explained it was a 42-acre site on three tax lots and that the map illustrates the location of the UGB and the city limits. Ms. Muir noted there were many questions related to transportation issues that must be addressed. She then referred the council to the table affixed to Attachment B that pointed to the annexation issues with the proposed site, the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) designation labels which stipulate that the area was low-density residential, and the updated Metro Plan – under appeal by homeowners—which showed those parcels designated as parks and open space. She said that legislative amendments would need to move forward to change these designations; additionally, development applications would be required, including a conditional-use permit application. Ms. Muir stressed that the information before the council was preliminary at this time. In conclusion, Ms. Muir said that staff recommended moving forward conceptually to ascertain if in fact such a proposal was viable. City Manager Taylor reminded the council that the proposed site was not in the zone identified by it as the preferred area; however, he pointed out that after searching for sites both inside and outside the preferred area over the past several years, the current proposed site under discussion was one of two final sites that the McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center would consider for a hospital and was therefore worthy of consideration. Mayor Piercy solicited council questions and comments. Ms. Taylor spoke to the quasi-judicial process, ex parte contacts and bias issues and asked Mr. Klein for an explanation of how they impact the City Council. Mr. Klein explained that a quasi-judicial process begins when an application was submitted and that the trigger date of application submittal was critical to determining when there was an ex parte communication. However, he added that the trigger date was not critical in terms of the issue of bias. For example, Mr. Klein went on, if a councilor stated he/she was opposed to any Metro Plan amendment, refinement amendment, or zone change for the property regardless what the criteria, application and testimony contained, the applicant could state that that individual could not act on those changes, as an opinion had been voiced prior to the application process. However, Mr. Klein pointed out that one could state that he/she did or did not favor a particular site, but would agree to await the criterion that governs the application and the evidence submitted prior to making a firm decision. Ms. Taylor opined that the site under discussion was not a preferable site for staff to consider. Mr. Pryor declared a direct conflict of interest around issues related to McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center and/or Triad Corporation, explaining that a family member was an employee of the medical center and that he, therefore, would not participate in the discussion or vote on the motion. Ms. Ortiz declared a potential conflict of interest around issues related to McKenzie Willamette Medical Center or Triad Corporation as she was an employee of Peace Health Medical Center. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 7 Work Session Mr. Papé shared that he was an unpaid board member of the Willamette Community Health Solutions Foundation which owned 20 percent of McKenzie Willamette-Triad Enterprise and therefore declared a potential conflict of interest. Mr. Kelly stressed that early transportation and traffic information would be critical to the process. He asked if a general transportation model could be provided to the council. City Engineer Mark Schoening explained that a preliminary analysis had been completed for the siting of the hospital on the EWEB site and therefore the volumes of trip generations was available but not the timing or the location of the trips within a 24-hour period. He said that the applicant would normally take on such a project. He added that that information was not necessary for the EWEB site as an amendment to the Metro Plan was not a require- ment. Mr. Kelly opined there was a perception, as well as a reality, of how long it takes to travel from one location to another. He said that travel times from destinations within the city limits to the proposed site could be of value to this process. Mr. Kelly asked staff to confirm in writing if part of the hospital foot print was outside the Eugene UGB. Ms. Bettman conceded that it was the responsibility of the council to consider the application once it was submitted. However, she opined that the council should not break with precedent and provide extraordinary services or resources to this issue. Ms. Bettman then asked what the scope of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) would include. City Manager Taylor replied that it was premature to respond to that question as many specifics needed to be reviewed. He said he would request that McKenzie-Willamette identify its needs in order to locate in that site and that information would be included in the MOU for the council’s consideration. City Manager Taylor conceded that considerable staff resources would be required to respond to the number of questions put forth by the proposed applicant. Ms. Bettman suggested that the MOU include a question as to what entity would fund the necessary staff resources required for this process—particularly prior to the application submittal. She opined that the taxpayers should not be expected to absorb such costs prior to the formal application process. Additionally, she suggested that specifics around annexation agreements be included in the MOU with a question as to what entities would fund the staff resources to draw up those agreements; further, the MOU should address the disposition of the 13 acres outside the UGB. Ms. Bettman asked if a purchase agreement was dependent on the Metro Plan amendment and zone changes; additionally, she asked what the result would be if the City processed those changes and then no hospital was constructed. Ms. Bettman then asked staff to provide an estimate of the minimum timeline for the entire process. Ms. Muir responded that the Lane County Local Government Boundary Commission would not address the annexation issue until early February, the Metro Plan amendment and zone changes would follow annexation, and the entire process would take approximately one year. Mr. Papé spoke to the transportation issue and questioned if the transportation improvements, if necessary, would need to be completed prior to the development of a site. Mr. Klein responded that following the Certificate of Need decision involving Peace Health, the Land Conservation and Development Commission revised the transportation planning rule. He said he would craft a memorandum for the council outlining those changes. City Manager Taylor noted that the applicant normally undertakes a Transportation Impact Study (TIA) and submitted it as part of its application. With regard to the Metro Plan amendment, he continued, the issue of what was a “significant effect” must be stated in written form by the applicant and a discussion of when and how that would take place would ensue with City staff and McKenzie-Willamette. City Manager Taylor added that it would be the recommendation of staff that the applicant process an MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 8 Work Session annexation request for the part of the parcel that was located within the UGB so that the Metro Plan changes would be a single jurisdiction. Therefore, the Eugene City Council, solely, could make the changes if the property were annexed into the city. Mr. Papé asked for a status report on the EWEB site. City Manager Taylor reported that the EWEB commissioners voted to reject the offer from McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center at its last meeting. He added that the EWEB commissioners had not yet made a decision as to when and how the utility might relocate. Mr. Poling stated he supported the council goal of locating a hospital within the preferred area; however, he said that if there was a willing seller of a property and a hospital willing to locate outside that preferred area, the application process should be allowed to move forward. He said that until additional information was provided, he could not provide a statement of support for the proposed site under discussion. Mr. Poling requested that staff provide an estimate of what the number of trips/vehicles would be if the property were to be fully developed out to its allowed density. Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Solomon, moved to direct the City Manager to begin work with McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center on a Memorandum of Understand (MOU) for the proposed site of Delta Highway, north of Aires Road; further, that City Manager Taylor shall return to the City Council with significant policy or fis- cal issues that arise during this work; and further, that City Manager Taylor shall return to the City Council a review of the draft MOU. Ms. Ortiz asked if the property would revert back to its previous zoning if McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center decided, following approval of the Metro Plan amendment and zone changes, not to build on the proposed site. Ms. Muir responded that typically, the changes stay with the property but not necessarily with the use. Mr. Kelly stressed that a rapid response from staff with regard to policy and fiscal issues was critical. He then spoke to the 2003 City Council resolution which included language around incentives within the 2-½ mile radius of the central city and that the council welcomes the siting of a major hospital anywhere in the city of Eugene. Ms. Bettman suggested that the initial phase of the MOU ascertain who would fund the resources to undertake the advance preliminary work and the second phase implemented when there was an actual application. She pointed out that the council was already providing preferential treatment by dedicating staff resources and council time to the issue. Ms. Bettman spoke of the staff resources which would be taken away from other council priorities and opined that taxpayers should not subsidize this particular choice. Ms. Bettman spoke to the letter sent to City Manager Taylor from Chief Executive Officer Roy Orr of McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center, and pointed out that it stated that the hospital wanted to assure itself the property can be rezoned, the utilities would be available, that transportation would be improved, and what fees and other costs the City was willing to absorb. Mr. Bettman opined that the City should not absorb any fees or provide incentives, and that the City could not assure any of the above requests. She asked that the point be clarified in the MOU that there was a public process which must be adhered to and that there were no assurances of what the outcome would be. In terms of timelines and costs, Ms. Bettman pointed out that other sites have been rejected in the past because it had been determined there were too MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 9 Work Session many obstacles or the process would be too timely Mayor Piercy observed that she would not need to cast a vote on this motion; however, she stated for the record that she voiced support to gather the information necessary to make an informed decision. Ms. Bettman pointed out there was no way to anticipate at the beginning of the process what obstacles may arise such as the resistance in the community and the costs, and therefore stated it would be prudent to incorporate a “Plan B”in the area preferred by the council. Mr. Papé questioned if McKenzie-Willamette could transfer its Certificate of Need from one site to another if a site were to be identified in the preferred area. City Manager Taylor responded that staff would research that question and respond to the council. He added that staff had researched at least 30 sites and rigorously reviewed five in the preferred area and would continue to do so. City Manager Taylor commented that McKenzie-Willamette Medical Center wants to build a 148-bed hospital, with 100,000 square feet of medical office space, and therefore this proposal had some benefit to the City in terms of a tax base. Mayor Piercy shared that the representatives of McKenzie-Willamette Hospital made it very clear to the City that they have exhausted their search for a hospital with the two final sites at Delta Highway and Glenwood now under consideration. City Manager Taylor pointed out that the Glenwood site did not include option agreements. Mr. Kelly pointed out that the Glenwood site was yet another flood plain site. The motion passed 6-1-1 with Ms. Taylor in opposition, and Mr. Pryor abstaining. The meeting adjourned at 7:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dennis M. Taylor City Manager (Recorded by Joyce Ogden) MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 28, 2005 Page 10 Work Session