CC Minutes - 10/16/06 Public Hearing

Home Browse Search

Ms. Seese Green said that the WCC did not oppose infill or density but wanted it done in a way that fit in with the neighborhood. The WCC supported infill compatibility standards. She said that the WCC did not appreciate being accused by a City staff person of having a NIMBY (Not in My Back Yard) attitude as recently occurred at a general meeting. She did not believe that the WCC had done anything to give that indication, and she did not think it was right for a City staff person to give that impression. Tom Slocum , 1950 Grand Drive, was opposed to the ordinance. He said that anyone who got property rezoned for an increase in value paid more in taxes on the property in question. They would develop the property and the City would receive increased revenues. He said the ordinance, if passed, would slow development to the point where the City would have further trouble paying its bills. He also anticipated that the City would encounter problems with areas such as Santa Clara, which if annexed would increase in value. The ordinance would preclude future annexations and residents of those areas would take advantage of the City services they could get without paying for them. Mr. Slocum suggested that 1000 Friends of Oregon think about the issue again as he believed the community’s failure to increase its UGB and the type of development the City required, which was not necessarily what people wanted, was resulting in the growth of satellite communities. Those who yelled most about sprawl were watching it happen right now. Mr. Slocum said that Eugene was the principle architect of that sprawl. If the ordinance passed, he believed that there would be more people wanting to move out to all the subdivisions that would be created outside the UGB in the county. Tom Hafferty , 4510 Manzanita Street, thought Oregon’s land use system was a visionary one that had avoided what he considered to be undesirable development in other places. He acknowledged the impetus behind Ballot Measure 37 and noted other communities were merely waiving their rules instead of paying compensation. He applauded the council’s desire to not give in to whatever changes people wanted to make to their private property but to actually step up and pay those owners compensation. He acknowledged that it would cost money to keep Eugene more livable but he thought the ordinance was an innovative way to do so. Developers would pay a one-time cost and he thought that was appropriate. There being no other requests to speak, Mayor Piercy closed the oral portion of the public hearing. Councilor Papé, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to leave the record open until 5:30 p.m. on October 30. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 8:0. Councilor Ortiz thanked all those who spoke. She asked what time those wishing to provide written information to the council should do that. Mayor Piercy suggested that it be provided at the time when people signed up to speak. Council Coordinator Lynda Rose said that she could get any materials provided to her earlier in the day of the meeting to the City Council that same day, and information submitted at public hearings was provided to the council in its Thursday packet. She emphasized the need for staff to receive such materials so it could keep the public record accurately. Mr. Klein added that any testimony related to a land use proceeding should be provided to staff for distribution to the council as part of the official record. Councilor Ortiz encouraged those submitting such information to submit it before the meeting. Responding to a question from Councilor Poling, Mr. Klein clarified that property owners affected by an action of the City Council would not be required to pay for the increase in value until he or she applied for an “upzoning.” Councilor Poling asked if the property owner paid the value of the property at the time the MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 4 Public Hearing