|
<br />Mr. Obie asked Mr. ehenkin if the PUD ordinance would apply to
<br />the mobile home park subdivision. Mr. Chenkin replied it could
<br />apply if it varied from'the standard zone development, but it
<br />was not necessary for a conventional subdivision. Mr. Bradley
<br />asked if it would be possible to restrict mobile home subdivisions
<br />in newly-zoned R-l areas after a certain date. Mr. Chenkin re-
<br />lied no, that the proposed amendment would not vary between the
<br />new R-l and the old R-l zoned areas.
<br />
<br />e
<br />
<br />e.B. 1337--Authorizing zoning code relating to mobile home parks
<br />and subdivisions, amending Sections 3.005, 3.285, 3.455(2),
<br />8.568(4), 8.690, 9.254, 9.310, 9.312, 9.324, 9.326, '
<br />9.354, 9.368, 9.424, 9.452, 9.544, 9.802, 9.804, 9.806,
<br />9.808, 9.810, 9.812, 9.814, 9.816, 9.818; repealing
<br />Sections 9.706(3),9.820, 9.822, 9.826, 9.828, 9.830,
<br />9.832, 9.834, 9.836, 9.838, and 9.840; and declaring
<br />an emergency was read by council bill number and title
<br />only, there being no Council member present requesting
<br />that it be read in full.
<br />
<br />Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel, that C.B. 1337 be read the
<br />second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent
<br />of the Council , and that enactment be considered at this time.
<br />
<br />Mr. Bradley indicated he felt uncomfortable on this particular
<br />issue as he could not see what ramifications it had for the future,
<br />whether it would accelerate more rapid growth, and whether that ~
<br />would be good or bad. He said he felt that having the conditional ~
<br />use permit in the interim might be more feasible with the possi-
<br />bility of later taking that out of the process. He said this
<br />was an extremely important decision and he felt it was necessary
<br />to have control of an independent hearing officer in the process.
<br />Mr. Bradley asked whether other cities have mobile home park con-
<br />ditional use permits. Mr. Chenkin replied yes, that both in Spring-
<br />field and Lane County, this was the case.
<br />
<br />Mr. Lieuallen asked if there were any other areas either in Portland
<br />or outside the state where mobile home parks and subdivisions are
<br />in existence. Mr. Chenkin replied that there were many. He said
<br />this would not be a unique situation, but that he couldn't cite any
<br />specific cities or states. He said Springfield does not feel that
<br />the mobile home parks and subdivisions are out of control in that
<br />area. He said that in all the areas with which he was familiar,
<br />there had been no negative responses regarding such developments.
<br />
<br />Mr. Bradley asked if the ordinance did provide for compact urban
<br />growth, he wondered whether there would be a problem with timing,
<br />with the compact urban growth over a spectrum of time period.
<br />He wondered what kinds of control there would have to be to place
<br />this subdivision development in its proper perspective without
<br />a conditional use process. Mr. Williams said he did not believe
<br />that the conditional use permit procedure is judgmental or based
<br />on timing, but rather whether the request for the conditional
<br />use permit conforms to the neighborhood. He said there is no
<br />
<br />-
<br />
<br />2/14/77--12
<br />
<br />88
<br />
|