Item 2: Ordinance on Minor Code Amendments

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT D th Ronald Smith , 335 West 38 Avenue, Eugene, speaking as a member of the Homebuilders Association, spoke in favor of the removal of MCA Nos. 5, 7, 8 and 11 from the list of minor code amendments under consideration by the Planning Commission. He said that the manner in which these amendments addressed density issues was contraindicative to reasonable expectations of future city planning needs as interpreted by the City Council and by the State of Oregon. He said that the amendments in question benefited only one neighborhood and did not take into account the well being of the City as a whole. Lorraine Still , P.O. Box 1213; Creswell, Oregon, spoke regarding MCA No. 1 regarding the number of dogs allowed by residents within City limits. She encouraged approval of the proposed amendment, and spoke on behalf of a friend and City resident who had once lost one of her two dogs and adopted another before finding her missing dog. She stated that under current City codes, her friend would not be allowed to keep her third dog. Ed McMahon , 1233 Hilo Drive, Eugene, speaking as executive vice president of the Lane County Homebuilders Association, spoke in favor of the removal of MCA Nos. 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10 and 11 from the list of minor code amendments under consideration by the Planning Commission. He said that these amendments were not at all minor and would have a dramatic impact on City policy. He said MCA Nos. 5 and 7 in particular would drastically reduce the amount of much needed campus housing in the University area, in addition to lowering property values and increasing emissions in the area. Kris Ward , 1134 Monroe Street, Eugene, spoke in favor of MCA No. 11 regarding the definitions and applications of alley access within City limits. She said that the alleys near her R-2 zoned property are not for permanent regular use or residential access, and that the proposed amendment would prevent future developments from creating and using alleyways for purposes for which they were clearly not intended. Dan Neal , 1361 Pearl Street, Eugene, spoke in favor of the removal of MCA No. 7 from the list of minor code amendments under consideration by the Planning Commission. He said that the parking requirements proposed by the amendment would seriously impede development of badly needed student housing, as well as other similar multi-family housing, in the University area including that of the COHO Townhouses project of which he is one of the developers. He strongly urged the Planning Commission to not pass MCA No. 7. MINUTES—Eugene Planning Commission May 21, 2008 Page 7