Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Mayor Obie a s ked the council if they had any comments regarding the <br /> amendments. <br /> e Mr. Miller expressed his appreciation for the work put in by Mr. Croteau and <br /> EWES. In response to statements made during the hearing, Mr. Miller said <br /> Eugene is an enlightened community because it has people on both sides of the <br /> solar access issue. Enlightenment is not just a property of one side. <br /> Mr. Miller said he is bothered that the council is criticized for spending <br /> time to try and make something such as solar access workable. He said there <br /> needs to be clear understanding of the percentages compiled by EWEB regarding <br /> energy loss. The board1s figures are based on 100 percent of the lots being <br /> impacted by the ordinance. Reiterating earlier comments, he said 80 percent <br /> of the building permits issued are not affected by the ordinance, which <br /> changes the actua 1 percentage of lost energy. Mr. Miller said it is his <br /> intention to have a solar access ordinance that is workable for the home <br /> builders and the people who want to buy those homes. He said it is also the <br /> intention of the council to realize the value of solar energy. <br /> Mr. Holmer said he found the public hearing testimony compelling on both sides <br /> of the issue. He said what the council is considering is the right for every <br /> property owner to have solar access. The amendments appear to weaken that <br /> right, sa i d Mr. Holmer, who added he intends to vote against the proposed <br /> amendments. He said the council should make sure in the future that the right <br /> of solar access does not preclude people from doing things that make sense to <br /> them. <br /> Ms. Wooten said she was also impressed with the testimony. She announced her <br /> intention to vote against the amendments with the exception of the slope <br /> e adjustment percentage. She appreci ated the comments from those who have <br /> entered into solar contracts, but she said those opportunities as they relate <br /> to right-of-way acquisitions are different with regard to the sun. <br /> Ms. Schue also addressed the issue of solar access agreements. Although such <br /> contracts may be feasible between certain parties, she said the real issue is <br /> the right of solar access that comes with the structure or individual piece of <br /> property. Guaranteeing that access is a function of local government similar <br /> to zoning codes and other regulations that bind properties. Ms. Schue said <br /> she is generally supportive of the ordinance as it is written. <br /> Mr. Bennett asked Mr. Croteau if he was correct in understanding that 80 <br /> percent of the lots in new subdivisions need to have north-south orientations. <br /> Mr. Croteau said that is correct, although some exceptions have been made for <br /> existing street patterns. The reason was so that people in subdivisions <br /> developed after January of this year will have an easier time siting their <br /> homes than people in lots developed before then. <br /> Mr. Bennett asked if the solar setback ordinance is specifically directed at <br /> the 20 percent of lots that are not required for a north-south orientation. <br /> Mr. Croteau replied that the ordinance is directed at all lots because even <br /> perfectly oriented north-south structures are capable of shading adjacent <br /> lots if improper siting of the house occurs. <br /> e MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 16, 1987 Page 7 <br />