Agenda Packet 1-23-19 Work Session

Home Browse Search

CLEAR & OBJECTIVE HOUSING: APPROVAL CRITERIA UPDATE November 13, 2018 DRAFT Preferred Concepts Report: Introduction Page 3 of 59 required materials. We also offered four two‐hour drop‐in “office hour” sessions for anyone wanting to ask more questions about the project, the land use process, or the issues and possible concepts discussed at the working groups. A compilation of the written comments received is included in Appendix A. This report is organized to present the preferred concepts for maintenance issues first followed by preferred concepts for the significant issues that were discussed with working groups. As a reminder, the items identified as maintenance issues represent procedural changes or amendments that can create consistency between the clear and objective and discretionary review tracks, consistency with other sections of the land use code, or otherwise improve efficiency or effectiveness. They require only maintenance‐level code revisions that are relatively straightforward. These maintenance level issues were not addressed as part of the working group sessions as they offer readily‐available solutions that require less attention and discussion relative to the larger, more challenging issues that were discussed by the working groups. In contrast the significant issues represent core challenges identified in the clear and objective approval criteria, and solutions raise larger policy questions that will affect a range of stakeholders. Due to the limited timeframe to consider issues, and the already high demand on participant time, working group time was focused on addressing the significant issues. The recommendations contained in this report were derived using input from the working groups, research into the issues and possible concepts, consultation with internal staff who work with the land use application review process daily, and a concept evaluation rubric for the 19 significant issues (COS‐ XX). For these reasons, in some cases recommendations may not reflect the apparent preference from the working group results. In these instances, an explanation for the discrepancy is provided. The draft, proposed solutions are conceptual only. Actual code language will be crafted in the next phase of the project (Phase 3), after conceptual solutions have been vetted. This approach is designed to narrow the focus of the code writing process. Community members, the Planning Commission and City Council will be asked to review the draft code language during Phase 3. This review and feedback will help determine the finer details and appropriate amounts for implementing specific requirements. All recommendations in this report are subject to Planning Commission review and modification, and ultimately require approval by City Council in order to move ahead to Phase 3, drafting proposed code changes. Organization of this report includes a summary table provided at the beginning of each section, followed by the following information for each issue: Description: Includes a brief explanation of the particular key issue. Applies to: Identifies the type of the land use application(s) that the issue applies to. Currently, there are clear and objective approval criteria for five types of land use applications: conditional use permits, site reviews, partitions, planned unit developments and subdivisions. Existing Code Section(s): Provides the pertinent section number(s) of Eugene Code Chapter 9 (land use code). January 23, 2019, Work Session – Item 1