CCMinutes - 11/08/04 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

use regulations in place when the property owner making a claim purchased their property. Mr. Klein said in lieu of compensation, a governing body could modify the regulations to the owner to use the property for a use allowed at the time of purchase. He believed that property owners would probably know what was allowed at that time before they filed a claim. Mayor Torrey suggested the City notify the State that if Ballot Measure 37 caused the City to be outside of State mandates it should be indemnified. Mayor Torrey asked if the actions taken by individual cities in Oregon could set precedents for others. Mr. Klein said not directly, but they could through case law as decisions were appealed to higher courts. Mayor Torrey also complimented Mr. Klein for his firm's work, and determined from Mr. Klein that several members of his firm and several members of City staff had participated in the development of the ordinance. Mayor Torrey said that Eugene was the leader in the State in terms of analyzing and preparing for the passage of the measure. Mayor Torrey called for a second round of council comments and questions. Responding to a question from Ms. Bettman, Mr. Klein said there was nothing in the measure to force property owners to consolidate claims. He believed property owners could file separate claims on separate regulations, but he noted the ordinance was structured to allow the council to consider more than the regulation the property owner wished to waive. The ordinance gave the council the ability to modify more than a single restriction back to the use that the property owner could have made of the property before the institution of Oregon's land use system. Ms. Bettman expressed concern about the possibility a property owner could "cherry pick" from among the provisions in the code, and she did not think the ordinance adequately addressed that. For example, a developer could ask the City to waive code standards for a multiple-unit housing project, but it was the code that gave the developer the ability to up-zone. Ms. Bettman did not think the council could make piecemeal decisions, and thought it fairer that the property in question revert back to its original zoning and code regulations in place at that time in all cases. Ms. Bettman spoke to the effect of the measure on future planning, questioning whether adoption of a cell tower ordinance with a 1,000 foot setback would create claims. Mr. Klein indicated that staff planned to review the City's regulations and attempt to identify where such potential issues existed. City Manager Taylor indicated there would be both work plan and budgetary implications from that review, and he suggested that legislative action could be required to address some of the internal inconsistencies in the measure. Mr. Klein reported that Lane Shetterly of the Department of Land Conservation and Development indicated that the State did not want to place local governments in a difficult position in terms of how they addressed the measure, and the State would be willing to talk to the local jurisdictions about how to address pending work plan items, such as the Goal 5 periodic review work tasks. He deferred further comment to John Van Landingham, chair of the Land Conservation and Development Commission, who indicate he could not discuss details until after the commission's December 4 meeting, but he believed that Mr. Shetterly had the commission's support. Speaking to Ms. Bettman's suggestion that all claims revert back to the land use regulations in place prior to adoption of the State system, Mr. Klein indicated staff could draft the ordinance to include the default, but it MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 8, 2004 Page 9 Work Session