Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
<br /> <br />ATTACHMENT D <br />Mr. Duncan, with regard to MCA No. 1, asked staff to clarify their definition of a kennel, and <br />asked staff to consider creating a special classification of foster dogs to include in the proposed <br />amendment. He asked staff to research the policies of Calgary, Canada—as mentioned during the <br />public hearing—and report those findings back to the Planning Commission. <br />Ms. Beierle asked staff for specific numbers as to how many lots would be affected by the minor <br />code amendments involving residential density. <br />Ms. Kneeland, with regard to MCA Nos. 5 and 7, asked staff for confirmation about the <br />applicability of the Metro Plan zoning requirements that were referenced in the public hearing, as <br />well as the impact on Goal 10 and the buildable lands inventory that had been done. <br />Mr. Hledik, with regard to MCA No. 4, asked staff for diagrams to clarify how the proposed <br />amendment would specifically be applied in determining building heights. <br />Mr. Hledik asked staff to evaluate the Infill Compatibility Study Task Team MiCAP <br />Recommendations of March 18, 2008 and the four footnotes contained therein, to ensure that those <br />recommendations were properly addressed by the proposed minor code amendments. <br />Mr. Hledik, hearing no further questions or comments from the Planning Commission or staff, <br />reminded the Commission of their deliberations meeting on June 2, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. <br />Mr. Hledik thanked those present and adjourned the meeting at 8:18 p.m. <br /> <br />(Recorded by Wade Hicks) <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene Planning Commission May 21, 2008 Page 12 <br />