HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes - 06/13/12 Work SessionMINUTES
Eugene City Council
McNutt Room --City Hall
777 Pearl Street — Eugene, Oregon
June 13, 2012
Noon
COUNCILORS PRESENT: George Brown, Pat Farr, Betty Taylor, Andrea Ortiz, George Poling,
Mike Clark, Chris Pryor, Alan Zelenka.
Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the June 13, 2012, work session of the Eugene City Council to
order.
A. WORK SESSION:
Envision Eugene
City Attorney Emily Jerome reviewed the motion still on the table:
Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Farr, moved to direct the City Manager to prepare, for a
formal adoption process, planning documents to establish a new Urban Growth
Boundary based on recommendations in the Technical Components Document
(Attachment A), and that carry forward the pillars and strategies described in the
Envision Eugene Draft Proposal, March 14, 2012.
Ms. Jerome reviewed the amendments to the motion made by the council on June 11.
Responding to a question from Mayor Piercy, Planning Director Lisa Gardner confirmed that the City's
consultant had confirmed the DAG Trust Partnership property could be included in the Goal 5 analysis.
Mr. Poling, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to amend Attachment A, Technical
Components document, by adding the DAG Trust property to a list of potential single -
family home expansion areas that staff will continue to analyze in the Land for Single -
Family Homes section of the manager's recommendation, column box D.
Mr. Poling believed the property should be studied for its residential potential because of several
important considerations, including that the property was directly adjacent to the urban growth boundary
(UGB), was in one ownership in four parcels totaling 300 acres, was undeveloped, and the owner desired
to be included in the UGB while the owners of other properties being contemplated for addition did not.
There were no wetlands or hydraulic soils on the property, it contained few slopes, and was not intensely
managed for resource purposes now.
Responding to a question from Mr. Zelenka, Ms. Gardner reviewed the staff analysis that would be
required and confirmed that staff was likely to analyze the property anyway. Further analysis would not
be an issue but she cautioned the council that there were hurdles to including the property inside the
UGB, including that it was not already designated for development.
MINUTES— Eugene City Council June 13, 2012 Page 1
Work Session
The motion passed, 6:2; Ms. Taylor and Mr. Brown voting no.
Mr. Farr, seconded by Mr. Clark, moved to direct staff to plan for a housing mix of 55
percent single family, 45 percent multi - family.
Ms. Ortiz acknowledged she was not invested in the ratio as she believed the market would drive the
ratio. However, she had received considerable input from those who had spent months of their time on
the topic and had changed her mind. She supported the motion.
Mr. Pryor said some might not find the difference between the ratios significant but at one level he
considered it a monumental difference because of the months of work put into the subject by citizens. He
determined from Ms. Gardner that the community and public input had supported the 55:45 ratio, but the
Community Resource Group had declined to offer a specific recommendation regarding the ratio
believing it was a policy choice for the council. Mr. Pryor thought the subject deserved more thoughtful
deliberation than could be accomplished at the last minute. He thought the ratio adopted at the June 11
meeting had been arbitrary and would call into question his ability to support the plan.
Mr. Zelenka did not think the adopted ratio had been arbitrary. The ratio was among the many ranges
discussed and many people were not in consensus regarding the higher single - family ratio. He said his
motion was an attempt to split the difference and arrive at a political compromise. He recalled that the
Sustainability Commission had preferred a number at the lower end of the range. He did not think the
council should merely rubberstamp the manager's recommendation without further analysis and the
potential of additional compromise.
Mr. Brown believed it was appropriate that the Community Resource Group had deferred to the council in
regard to the ratio. He concurred with Mr. Zelenka's remarks. He did not think that changing the ratio
was disrespecting the work of the Community Resource Group, which had not reached consensus on the
topic. He said the council could revisit the ratio in five years to determine if it was reflective of local and
national trends. He opposed the amendment.
Ms. Taylor did not think the council had to agree with its advisory committees to demonstrate its respect
for their work. The experts she considered knowledgeable did not support the staff - recommended ratio.
She continued to oppose expansion of the UGB and the council had the power to select a mix that did not
require any expansion. Ms. Taylor emphasized the importance of the pillar related to climate change and
resiliency and said that required people to drive fewer miles, for food to come from nearby, and air
protection aided by forest protection.
Mr. Farr noted the Planning Commission's support for the staff recommendation. He suggested the City
could reduce vehicle miles traveled if it made housing more affordable in the Eugene - Springfield
metropolitan area.
Mr. Clark expressed appreciation for the thoughtful and deliberative nature of the planning process and
said he wanted to honor the process and its results. He supported the motion.
Mayor Piercy expressed concern that many compromises had been made throughout the process but in the
end those who prevailed in regard to the housing ratio had been unwilling to see the council use its best
judgment to make any changes to the ratio. She appreciated the journey that the community had taken
and believed the community had grown in how members talked to each other, but she did not feel good
about the outcome represented by the motion.
MINUTES— Eugene City Council June 13, 2012 Page 2
Work Session
Ms. Taylor said there was nothing wrong with disagreement. She believed that the council needed to put
forth both alternatives to the community and seek more public input.
The amendment to the motion passed, 5:3; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Zelenka, and Mr. Brown
voting no.
The amended motion passed, 6:2; Mr. Brown and Ms. Taylor voting no.
Mayor Piercy adjourned the meeting at 12:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
lQ u� A WA
Beth Forrest
City Recorder
(Recorded by Kimberly Young
MINUTES— Eugene City Council June 13, 2012 Page 3
Work Session