Laserfiche WebLink
updates had been implemented with an eye to the future. He wondered if the commission would <br />think it worthwhile to formalize a review process, such as putting a sunset date on the Phase 1 <br />changes of three to five years in order to see if the goals they intended to achieve were being <br />achieved. <br /> <br />Mr. Lawless commented that he would be cautious given that the period of time a lack of <br />development had been experienced with the current standards in place had been seven years. He <br />would want to give the next iteration of the code a similar period of time. <br /> <br />Mr. Lawless pointed out that building infrastructure was an inherent part of building square <br />footage. He averred that floor area should be comprised of its gross outside footprint. Ms. <br />Laurence clarified that for the purposes of calculating FAR the entire square footage was included. <br />Mr. Nystrom added that it could have value to pull out FAR for its own unique definition. Mr. <br />Lawless thought there needed to be refinement as to what the plane of measurement was. <br /> <br />Mr. Lawless commented that this could also be applied to some of the other elements in the <br />diagrams, such as recessed entryways. He wondered whether a recessed entry would be considered <br />an outside space and whether it would be counted as an enhanced pedestrian amenity or was it a <br />piece of building. He could see 100 different ways to calculate and address these elements as he <br />was trying to design for a client. Mr. Nystrom agreed that a lot of the details could be difficult to <br />sift through. He said they needed to consider whether Phase 1 code amendments were a step in the <br />right direction. <br /> <br />Mr. Lawless averred that he would hate to see the limited portions in Phase 1 not be clearly <br />applicable. He felt some things could be cleaned up and “air tight.” <br /> <br />Ms. Laurence clarified that the only change proposed to the definition of FAR was to include <br />basement areas. <br /> <br />Ms. Beierle asked if the adjustment review would be the process in which such questions would be <br />answered. Ms. Laurence replied that it was hoped that individuals who used the code would not <br />have to undergo the adjustment review. She noted that Mr. Lawless’ concern regarding the <br />recessed entry related to code that would not be “touched” in the Phase 1 process. <br />MINUTES—Eugene Planning Commission April 28, 2008 Page 7 <br /> <br />