CC Minutes - 05/12/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Pap6 concurred with the remarks of Councilor Poling regarding the nature of the testimony. Councilor Pap6 agreed with Councilor Bettman about the one-size-fits-all nature of the overlay zoning, and advocated for site-specific planning in the drafting of the overlays. He urged the council to find money to fund a planner for the purpose of site-specific planning in nodes and to complete the needed code amendments. Councilor Pap6 noted his support for the recommendation of the Planning Commission and noted his support for changing the boundaries of the node as advocated by the former chair of the Planning Commission who had testified. Councilor Bettman agreed with much of the testimony offered regarding the proposed node. She said she has been working on developing TransPlan policies for the last 10 years and one of her objectives in nodal development was neighborhood protection. If the City created a plan that created uncertainty for residents, people would not reinvest in their neighborhoods and would move away. She said the City needed liveable residential neighborhoods in the core. The City needed to offer residents a variety of housing opportunities, and the only way to accomplish that was to look at specific opportunities to achieve density without negatively impacting existing neighborhoods. She called for good design standards that facilitated density at specific sites, and said that had to occur in collaboration with the neighborhood residents and businesses. Councilor Bettman also called for incentives for nodal development and the infrastructure needed for nodal development. She advocated for working with businesses and residents to do site-specific planning for each node. Councilor Kelly invited ideas from City Manager Taylor regarding sources of funding to do site- specific planning for nodes. Councilor Kelly said that nodal development must work in established neighborhoods as well as on greenfield sites or else the community would be unable to accommodate projected growth. He believed the problem was how the City was going about doing nodal development. Speaking specifically to the proposal before the council, Councilor Kelly found value in applying the \ND overlay zone to the area. He hoped the recommendations offered by the Planning Commission resulted in a more workable overlay zone that was still consistent with TransPlan. The overlay would provide interim protections for large parcels that could be redeveloped in a way that enhanced the neighborhood, and prioritized funding for the site-specific work. He recommended that the council consider the Garden Avenue area for nodal development opportunities. Councilor Kelly said that the testimony offered to the council appeared to be less opposed to the node than to the application of the overlay zone to the R-1 area. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 12, 2003 Page 13 Regular Meeting