CC Minutes - 09/09/02 Work Session

Home Browse Search

the City had done so much master planning for the property owners, it should require that mitigation occur through the City's bank. Ms. Nathanson suggested that the master planning effort had increased the value of the subject properties. Ms. Nathanson commended the comprehensive approach being taken to the wetlands issues. She hoped the regulatory agencies appreciated and understood the master planning approach because she believed it resulted in better wetland protections. Ms. Nathanson questioned the County's role in the planning process. Mr. Lowe said that the County would be involved because of its involvement in the Metro Plan amendments process. He said that the City staff also highlighted the assessment policy issue to the Board of County Commissioners. He believed that the property owners wanted the board to be involved, and he anticipated the commissioners would weigh in on all the concerns being expressed by their constituents, regardless of their formal role in plan adoption. Ms. Nathanson asked Mr. Lowe to discuss alleys and why they had not been built in residential developments over the past few decades. Mr. Lowe said that the City's alley standards resulted in a high-cost alley, and in addition alleys were often seen as redundant. The City's alley standards were revised through the Land Use Code Update so those costs should be lower. He noted that analysis had been done that indicated there was a rough equivalency in the pavement required to build a small width alley and the pavement required to build individual driveways in the front of parcels. Responding to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding the selection of waterway crossing locations and whether the number was adequate, Mr. Lowe said that vehicle crossings had been minimized to the degree possible and replaced with pedestrian crossings. More vehicle crossings would have been more expensive and would have created more environmental impacts. Mr. Pap8 thought the plan represented both an opportunity and a challenge. He determined from Mr. Lowe that the overall minimum residential density ranges were between 8 and 18 units per acre. The overall projected density was 12 units per acre. Mr. Pap8 asked if the proposed collector system was sufficient to handle that density level. Mr. Lowe said yes. Royal Avenue was already a minor arterial and the future extension of Roosevelt Boulevard would be a major collector. Mr. Pap8 determined from Mr. Lowe that there were two neighborhood parks, and the proposed open space system would function as a passive parks system. Mr. Lowe reported that 90 percent of the residents in the area were within two blocks of a park or open space. Mr. Pap8 asked how streets would be built if the City did not assess property owners for the cost. Mr. Lowe said that staff identified the inherent policy conflicts to the two planning commissions. However, the commissions agreed that the policy could be an incentive for development. The policy was a means of appeasing the property owners, who were particularly concerned about the costs of the development, in assisting with the indirect costs of development they did not really want. Mr. Pap8 appreciated the logic behind the recommendation, but questioned where the money needed to improve the streets would come from. Mr. Lowe said that the costs were not high; based on the first phase of development, the assessments would be about $3,100 per property. The principle in question was more significant than the costs in question. Ms. Childs added that the recommendation was offered in public testimony by the property owners and was not a recommendation from staff. MINUTES--Eugene City Council September 9, 2002 Page 15 Work Session