Laserfiche WebLink
Councilor Pap~ called for staff to come back with options on how to better address the flag lot <br />standards with special attention to setback and height limitations. There was general consensus on <br />the council. <br /> <br /> Councilor Bettman, seconded by Councilor Kelly, moved to amend Section <br /> 9.2175(7) by deleting subsection 2. Roll call vote; the motion passed, 6:1; <br /> Councilor Farr voting in opposition. <br /> <br />Councilor Rayor called for staff to clarify the language around geotechnical studies for slope. <br />There was general consensus among the council. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Farr regarding a review process to expedite review of <br />code issues, Ms. Bishow said staff would take it under consideration. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman called for options for a trigger point on certain landscape projects that would <br />require the services of a certified landscape architect. There was general consensus. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Pap~ regarding what would happen with the lot coverage <br />rule if the motion were passed as it currently stood, Ms. Bishow said that the lot coverage rule <br />would then revert to old code language. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Councilor Bettman regarding the language around maximum <br />driveway width, Ms. Bishow said row houses would need to have driveway/garage access from a <br />rear alley. Regarding multi-family residential, Ms. Bishow said that those were typically larger lots <br />that might have multiple driveways that had two-way traffic with wider ingress/egress situations. <br />She stressed that there had been no problems with driveway widths for multi-family housing under <br />the old code. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman raised concern that there was no longer a maximum driveway width above a <br />single family or secondary dwelling. <br /> <br />Ms. Bishow stressed that there was a maximum of one-half of the lot frontage. <br /> Roll call vote; the motion, as amended, passed unanimously. <br /> <br />City Manager Johnson asked the Council to consider Council Bill 4771 by number only. <br /> <br /> Councilor Kelly, seconded by Councilor Farr, moved that the bill be approved <br /> and given final passage. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 10 p.m. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council October 8, 2001 Page 9 <br /> Regular Session <br /> <br /> <br />