Laserfiche WebLink
City Manager Carlson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4804, an ordinance concerning <br />nodal development; amending Sections 9.3000, 9.3020, 9.6000, and 9.8320 of the Eugene Code, <br />1971; and providing an effective date. <br /> <br /> Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the bill, with <br /> unanimous consent of the council, be read a second time by Council Bill <br /> number only, and that enactment be considered at that time. <br /> <br />Councilor Taylor reiterated Councilor Bettman's concern and commented that building a huge <br />regional shopping center in the node would accomplish the opposite of reducing vehicle traffic in <br />that area. <br /> <br /> Roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. <br /> <br />City Manager Carlson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4804 by number only. <br /> <br /> Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the bill be <br /> approved and given final passage. Roll call vote, the motion passed, 5:2; <br /> councilors Bettman and Taylor voting in opposition. <br /> <br />Councilor Rayor commended staff for excellent work in planning the Chase Node. <br /> <br />City Manager Carlson asked the council to consider Council Bill 4805, an ordinance establishing a <br />Chase Node Special Area Zone; amending Sections 9.1030, 9.8030, 9.8865, and 9.9700 of the <br />Eugene Code, 1971; adding Sections 9.3100, and 9.3126 to that code; amending the Eugene <br />Zoning Map; amending the Eugene Overlay Zone Map; adopting a severability clause; and <br />providing an effective date. <br /> <br /> Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved that the bill, with <br /> unanimous consent of the council, be read a second time by Council Bill <br /> number only, and that enactment be considered at that time. Roll call vote, <br /> the motion passed unanimously, 7:0. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Nathanson regarding building entrances, City Manager <br />Carlson noted that there could be an entrance facing a parking lot but there would also have to be <br />an entrance facing the street. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Nathanson regarding the impact of removing the rule <br />that a building could only have one entrance, Mr. Yeiter said each building would have an entrance <br />but not necessarily each store within the building. <br /> <br /> Councilor Nathanson, seconded by Councilor Pap~, moved to delete Section <br /> 9.3115(1)(0(3) from the ordinance. <br /> <br />Councilor Rayor noted that many buildings had a central atrium with a entrances to the street and <br />parking lots, with multiple stores inside the building. He suggested that instead of deleting the <br />section, each commercial tenant of a building shall provide storefront access facing the street. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly said he would oppose the amendment. He said it was hard to imagine a arcade <br />style building that fit in a total of 2,500 square feet of floor area. He raised concern that the <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 12, 2002 Page 12 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />