CC Minutes - 10/13/03 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

to findings, due to an oversight on the part of staff or a lack of internal consistency. Mr. Klein responded that whether the record remained open or was closed was based on whether to provide the public the opportunity to continue to submit testimony. He specified that the closing of the record would only preclude the submission of additional evidentiary testimony. He provided a hypothetical example as a point of further clarification, stating that, should a councilor decide to carry out his or her own traffic count at the comer of one of the streets affected by the development, this sort of evidence would not be allowable after the closing of the record. Councilor Kelly thanked those who provided testimony. He applauded Arlie and Company and the ;;whole team" for a positive vision and a mixed-use development that will be a positive addition to the community. He complimented the design team and City staff on their work. Councilor Kelly felt that the exceptions, such as the one governing drive-through facilities, were crafted very narrowly. He supported this and conveyed his appreciation for the attention to detail. Councilor Kelly expressed concern that the commercial development would be built first and the residential development would be delayed ;;for years." He requested that staff address this. Regarding the floor area ratio (FAR), Councilor Kelly asserted that the lower FAR was too broad. He commented that the vision for the development submitted by Arlie and Company and included in the agenda packet called for more intensity than a 0.4 FAR would imply. He asked if the development could be developed as the Chase Node had been, in which, rather than utilitizing a blanket FAR, a portion of the development was required to be at least two functional floors. Councilor Taylor asked if it was too late to reopen the record. Mr. Klein replied that it could be reopened, but that reopening the record only meant that further testimony could be submitted by the public. Councilor Taylor moved, seconded by Councilor Bettman, to reopen the record and leave it open for seven days. Councilor Bettman called the development a %leeper," regarding public awareness of it. She felt that nothing could be hurt by keeping the record open. Councilor Papd asked staff to respond to concerns that the hearing was not adequately noticed. Ms. Bishow responded that, as per Eugene Code, all land-owners and residents within 300 feet of the development site received a mailed notice, all public agencies and the affected neighborhood group were provided notice, and numerous articles on the development had been published in the newspaper as well as the legal advertisement of the hearing. Mayor Torrey called for the vote. Roll call vote; the motion failed, 4:2; (Councilors Taylor and Bettman voting in favor). Councilor Papd concurred with Councilor Kelly that all parties involved in the planning and design of Crescent Village deserved kudos. Ms. Bishow clarified, in response to a concern expressed by Councilor Papd, that the trip caps were determined using a real set of numbers based on a real analysis of the proposed Crescent Village project. MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 13, 2003 Page 11 Regular Meeting