Laserfiche WebLink
applying parking lot landscape standards whenever there was a small addition would make <br />expansion prohibitively expensive. <br /> <br />There was general consensus among the council to leave the record open for an additional two <br />weeks. <br />Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing. He urged the council to submit its questions in writing <br />due to the time restrictions on the rest of the meeting. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly said it was impossible for him to submit his questions in a timely manner. He said <br />he would try to submit most of his questions in writing but raised concern over taking quick action <br />on such a intricate and large quantity of material. <br /> <br />Regarding the canopy tree issue, Councilor Kelly said there was no reason to completely eliminate <br />the need to plant canopy trees when there was a small number of sites where that would be a <br />problem. He said he would not support a complete deletion of that item in the code. <br /> <br />City Manager Carlson noted that there were timing problems with extending the record for two full <br />weeks since that would postpone action until the March 10 meeting. <br /> <br />Ms. Bishow suggested, to general consensus, keeping the record open until February 19 rather <br />than February 24. This would allow all additional written testimony to be submitted to the City <br />Council in advance of the February 24 meeting. <br /> <br />Ms. Bishow asked for clarification from the council on whether it wanted Ordinance 4 placed on <br />the agenda as an action item. Mayor Torrey indicated that it was the majority desire of the council <br />to deal with Ordinance 4 at that time. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman said in Ordinance 5 there were references to removing the word "orderly" from <br />the code in regard to the orderly extension of public streets and infrastructure and called for a <br />memo from legal counsel on how the interpretation of the wording would be changed. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman said Ordinance 5 had consequences that were unintended by staff and said <br />she would call for a clarification of language to rectify the situation. <br /> <br />Councilor Poling called for information on how the limit on slope grading was arrived at and also <br />called for information on the limitation on development over 900 feet in elevation. He also called <br />for information on allowing golf courses in agricultural zones between the city limits and the urban <br />growth boundary. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly objected to the hand-raise vote on going to accelerated action on Ordinance 4. <br />He raised concern that councilors would be forced to vote no on items because meeting time was <br />too limited to discuss matters to his satisfaction. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman reiterated Councilor Kelly's comments. <br /> <br />Councilor Taylor complained that the time limits on meetings did not allow time to discuss issues <br />to their full extent. She said each one of the ordinances needed discussion. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey suggested, to general consensus, to proceed to Item 8 on the agenda rather than <br />moving on to Item 7. <br /> <br /> MINUTES-Eugene City Council February 10, 2003 Page 11 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />