CCMinutes - 11/15/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Bettman said the applicant argued the property was unsuitable for residential use but it was suitable for a regional commercial use. She asked if there was a requirement that one could make the case for a use being more suitable than another. In her visits to Seattle she had noticed the proliferation of pornographic retailers next to motel uses along Interstate 5, and asked if the rezoning of the property would facilitate the development of such a use. Councilor Bettman noted that Lane County Commissioner Bill Dwyer developed a low-income residential property on land encumbered by power lines by locating other activities, such as storm water treatment facilities and parking, under the lines. She questioned the assertion the property in question could not be used for residential purposes. Councilor Kelly asked if the property owners' inability to make use of their property was a criterion for a refinement plan amendment. He recalled that Brackenfern Road was scheduled to be improved in 2006 and asked staff to confirm that detail. Councilor Kelly asked staff to outline how quickly a refinement plan amendment that addressed all property owner interests could be completed. He also asked staff to contrast ODOT's access control and distance at this location to the access control and distances existing along 1-5 already, particularly such as occurred in Wilsonville, where long distances did not seem to matter to the use of the commercially zoned area. Councilor Taylor asked if the City was obligated to find a use for everyone's property. She also asked how a motel could be needed by a neighborhood. Councilor Pap~ asked why the property in question was not included in the commercial node when the refinement plan was adopted. Ms. Thomas indicated she would follow up. Councilor Bettman spoke to information she would like to see regarding the relationship of the application to Ballot Measure 37. She said if the property was purchased before provisions of the Land Use Code Update or other relevant regulations were adopted, she wanted to know what may be eligible for a Ballot Measure 37 claim, and if there was a way to include a applicants' waiver to any Ballot Measure 37 claim as a provision of a zone change approval to provide protection for the City. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: An Ordinance Concerning Real Property Compensation; Adding Sections 2.070, 2.075, 2.080, 2.085, 2.090, and 2.095 to the Eugene Code; 1971; Declaring an Emergency; and Providing an Immediate Effective Date City Manager Taylor introduced the item, recalling that on November 8 the council reviewed an ordinance for implementing recently passed Ballot Measure 37 as of its effective date of December 2. The public hearing was the first of two scheduled. The second hearing would take place on November 22, 2004. Mayor Torrey opened the public hearing. C. Robert Suess Sr., 260 East 38th Avenue, said due to a series of frustrating obstacles and his age, his desire to develop his property for affordable residential housing had ended. He suggested the council step into the shoes of offended landowners for a short time. Mr. Suess cited those who had purchased land long ago to subdivide for their children, build on and enjoy in their later years, or to develop to fund their MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 15, 2004 Page 7 Regular Meeting