CC Minutes - 10/08/01 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. A letter from Goebel Engineering & Surveying, including a site plan of a proposed tentative partition, asserting that the code had limitations in regard to needed housing in the City. Councilor Taylor opened the public hearing. Kate McGee, 1466 Washington Street, expressed her desire to allowing only certified landscape architects to be able to plan and approve landscapes under the new code. She also raised concern that the minimum landscape requirements required by the code were too large. She added her preference that, rather than a list of approved plants listed in the code, there should be a list of prohibited plants. Daniel Hill, Arbor South Architecture, 4765 Village Plaza Loop, urged the council to return to the original code language regarding the 50-percent lot coverage rule. He maintained that density and lot limitations on lot coverage were not compatible and opined that the use of such rules was making lifestyle choices for citizens rather than providing good public policy. Martin Gascoyne, 78022 Pitcher Lane, spoke in opposition to allowing only certified landscape architects to prepare landscaping plans, but spoke in support of having a list of prohibited plants rather than a list of approved plants in the code. Mark Peeters, 2773 Kismet Way, stressed that non-certified landscape planners were capable enough to handle landscape work. Terry Connolly, representing the Eugene Chamber of Commerce, said that the chamber supported the amendments proposed by City staff. He stressed the importance of maintaining flexibility within the code. Regarding underground utilities, Mr. Connolly cited Eugene Code 9.6775, and said that the proposed language amendment helped to clarify when utility connections were required to be underground and when they were allowed to be above ground. He noted that EWEB and the chamber had concerns that reconstruction projects would pay more for underground utility connections than the cost of the actual projects. He urged the council to support the language amendments. Craig Timmons, 1220 Goodpasture Island Road, raised concern that by excluding non-landscape architects from being able to prepare landscaping plans, the code was excluding knowledgeable people. Steve Gab, 1818 Villard Street, encouraged the council to accept the staff-proposed amendments to Eugene Code 9.2171 and 9.2173. He stressed that non-landscape architects should not be excluded. He also encouraged the creation of a routine procedure for reviewing unintended MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 8, 2001 Page 3 Regular Session