CC Minutes - 12/11/02 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the tabled motion to read: "1 move to direct the City Manager to provide for system development charge discounts in nodes with the following two exceptions; 1. The discount shaft not apply to buildings that are 30,000 square feet on the ground floor or larger. 2. The discount shaft not apply to applications proposing needed housing as that term is defined in Eugene Code 9.60~0." Mr. Kelly said SDCs were reduced in nodes because studies had shown that there was lower vehicular traffic in nodes. He said a large warehouse type store located in a node would attract more vehicle traffic from other areas. Ms. Taylor said she would support the motion. Mr. Meisner offered a friendly amendment, which was accepted, to specify transportation for the SDC charge. In response to a question from Mr. Meisner regarding the staff reaction to the motion, Planning Director Jan Childs said that as part of the nodal development implementation work that would come to the council in 2003, staff was not proposing any code amendments so there would be no opportunity to make amendments on a node-by-node basis. In response to a question from Ms. Nathanson regarding whether there was a chance that the amendment might make a grocery store or other primary component of a node choose a different location that was not within a node, Planning and Development Department Director Tom Coyle said it could. He said many market chains would not adapt to alternative floor areas. He added that the distinction was whether the market would have to drop a facility that it wanted in the building. Mr. Coyle noted that the loss of space to a chain market would mean the loss of ancillary uses that those markets provided that would otherwise not locate in that node. He said there was a level of concern from the planning and development side because there was no specification of uses. Mr. Fart said it was probable that such a limit would discourage multi-business facilities from locating in nodes. He said the motion was not a good idea. In response to a question from Mr. Pap~ regarding whether State legislation provided for SDC discounts for needed housing, City Attorney Jerry Lidz said State legislation did not address that issue. He noted that the category of "needed housing" could encompass virtually any kind of housing. He said the "catchy title" did not limit the definition of "needed housing" to Iow-income housing. Ms. Bettman stressed the importance of fine-tuning incentives during a time of budget stress. She said her motion did not preclude/forbid any kind of development but would use incentives to help realize the objectives of nodal development. MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 11, 2002 Page 4 Work Session