Item 2A: Approval of Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

had few tools, particularly financial tools, to bring to the situation. Mr. Yeiter said that Harlow Neighbors asked the City to place a moratorium on the development of the property and consider zoning changes that would require a grocery store or at least limit the amount of non-retail development that occurred on the site. He said the neighbors would like to see more financial incentives created to facilitate a different type of development and additional staff resources placed toward the issue. Mr. Yeiter said that staff had spent considerable time over the past few months in an attempt to re-site the proposed medical use to the downtown core. For a variety of reasons, that had not worked out. Mr. Yeiter suggested that one option was for the City to purchase the property and become the developer. However, if there was no market for a grocery store, that would be problematic. He said that moratoriums contain loopholes, and staff did not recommend that approach. Mr. Yeiter referred the council to e-mail correspondence from Matt Grady of Gramor Development and from Terry Froemming of the Harlow Neighbors. Mr. Yeiter noted that the high-density residential development on the property adjacent to the area in question appeared to be working very well. Mayor Piercy called on the council for questions and comments. Ms. Taylor said the point of the mixed-use center was to give residents of the high-density residential development a place to go to shop. She did not think that would work with the medical clinic being proposed. She said the proposed development would not help the City satisfy State requirements in regard to VMT. Instead, there would be an increased need for autos because of the intense development without services nearby. If the property was developed as proposed, there would be no further opportunity for such services. She thought the City should do what it could to facilitate a grocery store use. Ms. Taylor asked about the loopholes associated with the moratorium. Mr. Yeiter said that the most obvious was that the State law required a 45-day notice for a moratorium, which was sufficient time to allow a property owner to become vested in a development application. City Attorney Glenn Klein concurred. The State law had a process in place that included, at a minimum, the 45-day notice. There was an additional 45 days allowed for public comment. Any one who applied for a permit was allowed to have the permit evaluated on the code in place at that time. Even an incomplete building permit application was acceptable under State law. Ms. Taylor asked if the City could deny approval of a medical facility on the site, and if there was any other suitable land in the area for such a grocery store. Mr. Yeiter thought it would be difficult to deny the medical facility use. He added the medical facility would not use the entire 8-1/2 acres of the site. However, he was unsure the remaining land would be large enough for a grocery of the size desired by the council and neighbors. Grocers usually locate where there was other retail uses to attract customers. Mr. Yeiter said there were about two acres zoned for commercial use on the east side of Garden Way that might be suitable for a grocery store. Staff had discussed the potential ofrezoning more commercial land but would then have to replace the lost residential land. Ms. Bettman said the smaller footprint for the grocery store she had preferred was not intended to limit the MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 11, 2005 Page 10 Work Session