CC Minutes - 01/27/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Responding to a concern expressed by Mr. Poling, Mayor Torrey recommended that he contact Sheldon High School about the neighborhood parking program. He said that there was plenty of evidence showing that people wanted to visit friends living on the street but were unable to do so because they had no sticker. He could see both sides of the issue. Mr. Poling asked about evidence regarding the impact of after-school activities on the total number of parking spaces on neighborhood streets. He cited Friday night football games as a good example, adding he had already heard from some people on the issue. Ms. Taylor suggested that high school students be notified of the hearing and invited to testify. Ms. Bettman said that the reason for the amendments process was to fix unforeseen problems or errors. She wanted another column in the matrix included in the staff materials that indicated where the change being proposed had originated. She said that the council was spending staff resources and council time processing amendments that addressed land use policy issues, not inconsistencies or scrivener's errors. She asked why these amendments were being processed before others of more interest to her. She wanted a process that ensured council-identified priorities were addressed and did not get postponed. Ms. Solomon asked if the parking at the adjacent community center was factored into the parking allotment for Sheldon High School. Ms. Bishow said that both entities preferred to operate their own parking, and there were bollards to prevent movement between the two parking lots. If the City was determining the allowable parking, each use would be able to provide the maximum allowed parking. She noted that School District 4J wanted to provide more parking at Sheldon High School but did not think that it could. She indicated she would prepare a matrix prior to the public hearing and convey the council's questions to the two school districts prior to the public hearing and encourage them to provide testimony. Mr. Meisner asked that staff solicit written or oral testimony from LTD staff on what LTD was doing to work with the school districts to make its alternate modes programming more effective. Ms. Taylor requested that Ms. Bishow comment on Ms. Bettman's remarks. She said that it appeared the council was doing the land use code "over and over." Ms. Bishow indicated she would follow-up with a memorandum prior to the public hearing. Ms. Bettman spoke to the elimination of quasi-judicial procedures in Chapter 2. She noted that the section included provisions above what was required by State statute, and she had requested a list of such provisions. Emily Jerome of the City Attorney's Office indicated she could provide that information at the hearing. She noted that quasi-judicial provisions were only used for Chapter 9 processes, with the exception of condominium conversions, so they were placed in that chapter. Staff placed the provisions not covered by State law or other procedures in Chapter 9 and neglected to delete them from Chapter 2. Ms. Jerome said that the recommendation related to the elimination of quasi-judicial procedures was essentially to clean-up the code, but it was possible that staff would recommend against that because there were many procedures the code contained that the council liked to use. Mr. Kelly recommended that if staff analysis indicated that something needed would be lost, perhaps that could be moved to Chapter 9 and deleted from Chapter 2. Ms. Jerome indicated the council would be provided with options. MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 27, 2003 Page 6 Work Session