Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Plywood asserted that there has been "enforcement" as that term is used in Measure 37, and that <br />since Lane Plywood can change the CC&Rs, the provision in there does not justify denial. The <br />likely response from Lane Plywood to this option would be to file a lawsuit challenging the decision. <br />If Lane Plywood was successful, the City likely would be required to pay Lane Plywood's attorney <br />fees, in addition to any compensation awarded by the court. <br /> <br />(2) Pay compensation in the amount of the reduction in value. Lane Plywood asserts that such amount <br />is in the neighborhood of $5 million. If the council chooses this option, the City should obtain an <br />appraisal from a certified appraisal and then attempt to reach agreement with Lane Plywood on the <br />amount of compensation. <br /> <br />(3) Approve the waiver of regulations as requested by Lane Plywood - essentially all of the land use <br />code (Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code), a number of other provisions in the Eugene Code that are <br />incorporated by reference into chapter 9, and provisions in the Metro Plan and related documents. <br /> <br />(4) Approve a waiver of only those regulations that meet the criteria contained in Measure 37. Lane <br />Plywood did not identify which of the Eugene Code and Metro Plan provisions (totaling hundreds of <br />pages) Lane Plywood really believes qualify for compensation under Measure 37, i.e., Lane <br />Plywood did not identify which are "land use regulations," which "restrict the use of property," <br />which "reduce the value," and which are not encompassed by one or more of the exemptions in <br />subsection (3) of Measure 37. The City Council could approve a waiver that would read as follows: <br />"The City shall not apply those provisions of Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code that (a) are "land use <br />regulations" as that term is defined by Measure 37; (b) "restrict the use" of property as that phrase is <br />used in Measure 37; (c) have the effect of reducing the fair market value of the property; and (d) do <br />not meet one of the exemptions contained in subsection (3) of Measure 37." Where provisions are <br />not applied under this waiver, the comparable provision in effect at the time Lane Plywood acquired <br />the lot would be applied. Attached as Attachment B is a draft decision to implement this option. <br /> <br />CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION <br />The City Manager recommends Option 4. In light of the uncertainties related to how the courts will (a) <br />interpret "enforcement" and (b) deal with the issue of CC&Rs, there is a substantial monetary risk with <br />Option 1. Given the acreage covered by Lane Plywood's Measure 37 claim and the location and <br />characteristics of the property (for example, not significant natural resource values worth preserving), <br />use of the City's limited financial resources to pay compensation does not appear warranted. Option 4 <br />would give to Lane Plywood a waiver in lieu of compensation that is no broader than justified by <br />Measure 37. <br /> <br />SUGGESTED MOTION <br />Move to adopt Attachment B (Option 4). <br /> <br />ATTACHMENTS <br />A. Proposed decision denying Measure 37 claim. <br />B. Proposed decision approving a waiver of those portions of Chapter 9 that meet all of Measure 37's <br />criteria. <br /> <br />LICMOl2006 Council Agendas1M0606261S0606266.doc <br />