CCMinutes - 11/22/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the context of the claimant. He conveyed EAR's opposition to the section concerning real property compensation because certain features were felt to be an extreme response. He thought the ordinance to be premature as the Oregon Legislature would convene in January and would apply enacting legislation to help guide local jurisdictions. He speculated that this legislation may apply retroactive or preemptive language that might deem the Eugene ordinance invalid. Mr. Welsh called Section 2.080(1) open-ended and intimidating. He recommended that fees be established that were consistent with the cost of doing business for other land-use action process fees. He felt very few individuals would be willing to proceed without knowing what the cost would be. Regarding Section 2.090(1), he asserted that according to the language the claimant could be held responsible for paying for a public hearing and for the subsequent meetings of the City Council. He also found Section 2.090(4) to be intimidating as it allowed for the reintroduction of previous land use regulations in effect at the time the property was acquired. He called out Section 2.090(5) and noted that it required the Measure 37 resolution to be personal to the claimant and not to the property. He suggested that this could make the resolution invalid and void upon transfer of ownership. Lauri Segal, 120 West Broadway, spoke on behalf of 1,000 Friends of Oregon. She appreciated the council's review of the ordinance but felt the changes for the public good had not been made explicit enough. She recommended that Section 2.075 include a requirement that names and addresses, including residences and mailing addresses, be recorded so that claims submitted by out-of-state owners could be tracked. Regarding Section 2.075(d), she noted the ordinance required an appraiser certificate and licensure for an appraisal by a claimant and requested that the ordinance also specify that the appraiser not be related to or affiliated with the property owner involved in the claim. She related that Section 2.075(4) indicated that the City Manager would post information relating to a claim on the City's Web site. She recommended that the City participate in a statewide claims registry, not yet established. She suggested an additional subsection, the language of which would require that a notice of a pending claim would be sent to any owners or occupants within 300 feet of the perimeter of the subject property and neighborhood groups or community organizations officially recognized by the City Council whose boundaries include the property. She asked that, under Section 2.090, the council not have the discretion to consider a public hearing prior to taking final action. Jozef Zdzienicki, 1025 Taylor Street, averred that the notification process should include adjoining houses, houses across the street and behind the property, and the process should be conducted by mail. He thought the notification process would make it fair for everyone and not just the person applying for a permit. David Hinkley, 1350 Lawrence Street, Apartment 7, supported the ordinance, with reservations. He did not think it was premature as the measure went into effect on December 2. He opined that part of the reason the measure passed was the public's sense that faceless bureaucrats were taking away property rights. He felt the measure could be categorized as "having faceless bureaucrats consider a claim." He noted that in his written testimony he suggested these claims be handled in the Municipal Court rather than administratively through the City Manager's Office. His second reservation had to do with the section governing public hearings as he thought the public hearing should be required. He felt the individual claims could be as controversial as the measure itself had been. Mr. Hinkley approved of the Eugene ordinance sections that instituted the private cause of action. He opined that the purpose of land use regulations was to provide rules to enable people to live in close proximity to one another amenably. He thought the Eugene ordinance balanced out the implications of the MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 2004 Page 9 Regular Meeting