AMENDED Agenda Packet 10-14-19 Meeting

Home Browse Search

MINUTES – Eugene City Council September 16, 2019 Page 3 Work Session o Councilor Zelenka – asked for clarification of the motion o Councilor Clark – said he wanted to incentivize the building of ADUs; would preferaction on the ordinance to happen at the same time council acts to incentivize ADUs. RESTATED MOTION (with friendly amendment): Move to direct the City Manager to come back with a memo addressing a 10-year property tax exemption for any additional property value attained from an ADU, an SDC discount or credit for ADUs, and other financial incentives identified by staff. o Councilor Taylor – requested clarification on whether the motion was to be votedupon that evening. o Councilor Zelenka - requested clarification on whether the City already had SDCcredits for ADUs; sought confirmation that a tax exemption would only apply to thecity of Eugene portion of the property taxes and which SDCs could be reduced. o Mayor Vinis – questioned whether there was time to prepare the research memoand also take action on the ADU regulations prior to the State’s deadline. o Councilor Syrett – said she did not think the concurrent work on the ADU incentivesand regulations was necessary and preferred the two conversations to happensequentially. o Councilor Semple – said she was not supportive of a property tax exemption, butwas willing to vote for the motion in order to move the entire topic of ADUincentives forward for staff to work on. VOTE: PASSED 6:2, Councilors Taylor and Zelenka opposed. MOTION: Councilor Yeh, seconded by Councilor Syrett, moved to direct the City Manager to revise the draft ordinance to eliminate the ADU standards for the AG, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and S-E zones that apply only to flag lots, making ADUs on flag lots in those zones subject to the same flag lot standards that apply on regular (non-flag lot) lots in the same zone. o Councilor Yeh – said she found special regulations for flag lots to beunreasonable. o Councilor Clark – noted the motion, if passed, would reverse the R-1 codeamendments from 2014; planned to vote against the motion because he thoughtit would make the conversation about ADUs more complex, thereby furtherdelaying the building of them. o Councilor Pryor – recalled that the 2014 code amendments had significantimpact in the number of ADUs built; planned to vote for the motion because itwould make ADUs more viable. o Councilor Syrett – said she voted against the code changes in 2014 because theywere deliberately designed to restrict ADU development; thought looseningregulations would help to support families and homeowners to build moreADUs, though she did not expect it to be a high number. o Councilor Taylor – said she thought council should take care not to reverseprevious decisions. September 14, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A