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

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman referred to Section 9.2761, Special Standards for Table 9.2760. She suggested that Section 5(c) either be revised or a minimum listed so it did not sound as though it limited the density to nine units per net acre. Ms. Bishow found the suggestion reasonable but suggested that direction on amendments be deferred until following the hearing. Ms. Bettman wanted to make the change prior to the public hearing if there was council consensus now. Mayor Torrey asked in the future that staff identify issues raised by the council that the commission did not discuss. Mr. Kelly suggested that trivial changes that clarified the text rather than addressed policy issues could be addressed prior to the public hearing. He referred to Section 9.6210 on page 30 of the council packet and noted the current code requirement for one canopy tree every 50 feet. He was willing to adopt a change that would not require such trees on small sites. He suggested, however, that the change being proposed meant that planting of a canopy tree might never be required, and asked staff to consider alternative text. Ms. Bishow noted that the Planning Commission discussed this issue, and she would provide the council with a summary of that discussion. Ms. Bettman said that while some recommendations might be clarifications of the existing text, if it was unclear to the council what was a clarification and what was not, it would be unclear to the council's constituents. Regarding Section 9.2761(5)(b), she asked if the text needed clarification to exclude nodal development, which had a minimum density of 12 units per net acre. Ms. Bishow indicated she would follow-up on the question in time for the public hearing. Referring to Section 24 in Ordinance 5, specifically the overlay zone, Ms. Bettman said that while she understood that the City needed flexibility in the Broadway overlay zone, it kept building flexibility into the code and creating situations where it was easier for the City to offer an adjustment review. She asked about the impact from that on the staff work load. She requested an option that deleted the last sentence in Section 9.8030(14) as already suggested by staff and the retention of Section 9.8030(14)(a)(b). Mr. Kelly asked what overlay zones would be affected; if it was only Broadway, he would feel better. Ms. Bishow indicated she would follow-up. C.EXECUTIVE SESSION The council met in executive session pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes 192.660(1)(h). The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Carlson City Manager pro rem (Recorded by Kimberly Young) MINUTES--Eugene City Council January 27, 2003 Page 7 Work Session