CC Minutes - 07/28/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the rest of the street was not, and that the paving would occur in a patchwork of phases and streets would lack continuity. Mayor Torrey closed the public hearing and requested comments from the council. In response to a question from Councilor Bettman, Ms. Childs explained that council had brought up, in a study session, that a clear and objective rewrite of the issue encompassed by 9.8165(e), now (d), could not adequately address the full range of the issue that had been remanded. She said that staff had been unable to develop clear and objective language that addressed the issue in its entirety. She commented that the ' 15 percent or greater' stipulation was the best attempt by staff to create a clear and objective standard. Councilor Bettman commented that the stricken language minimized excavation and embankment and avoided impacts to natural resources including water-related features. She felt that a natural resource protection was being eliminated. Councilor Bettman questioned why the traffic calming provision in the code was being "thrown out." She wondered why language could not be crafted so that a clear and objective report from a traffic engineer indicating such a thing would not be needed would eliminate the requirement. She asserted that it would make sense to maintain the policy intent and reword it so that there were clear and objective standards as to what threshold the increase in traffic would have to reach to trigger this requirement. Ms. Childs deferred to the City Attorney's office, noting that staff had experienced difficulty developing language that would meet the statutory tests. In response to a question from Councilor Kelly, Ms. Childs stated that the change on page 145 that would clarify public way widths would be embedded in Ordinance B or come as an amendment. Councilor Kelly requested that his fellow councilors indicate by a nod of the head whether it was acceptable to embed this change in the ordinance. Members of the council indicated general agreement on this. Councilor Kelly requested a written staff response to the issue that Ms. Cuellar raised regarding street width and paving requirements. Councilor Pap~ asked how the street improvement requirements would be implemented if a developer had four or five lots with roads all around them. Ms. Childs responded that she would include this example in the written response from staff, but that she would rather not reply to the question without careful study. MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 28, 2003 Page 9 Regular Meeting