10.23.2019 City Council Work Session Minutes

Home Browse Search

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 lot standards that apply on regular (non -flag lot) lots in the same zone. o Councilor Yeh - said she thought it was unreasonable to treat flag lots as if they were fundamentally different from another type of lot. o Councilor Semple - said she thought flag lots were fundamentally different because they were landlocked and wanted to protect green space and privacy. o Councilor Zelenka - asked for clarification about lot size minimums for ADUs built on flag lots; asked whether the Land Use Board of Appeals challenge covered issues pertaining to flag lots; asked how many lots there were that met the minimum and what was challenged related to flag lots in the LUBA remand; said he doubted the motion would accomplish much. o Councilor Syrett - said she thought owners of flag lots should not be more restricted in developing their land than owners of lots with different shapes; shared her intent to support the motion. o Councilor Taylor - said she preferred to postpone the entire conversation about ADUs; supported reviewing each proposed change individually. o Councilor Clark- said his intention in proposing the R-1 code amendments in 2014 was to protect the rights of property owners and the quality of life in R-1, rather than to limit ADUs or the ability of land owners. o Councilor Pryor - said he thought the R-1 code amendments were designed to limit owners' ability to develop their land; wanted to continue to uplift livability while accommodating a growing population in accordance with Senate Bill 100. o Mayor Vinis - noted the Climate Recovery Ordinance called on council to find ways to live and grow within the urban growth boundary, which would require more people to live in the city's neighborhoods; said she thought flag lots were an opportunity to add infill. o Councilor Taylor - said she felt changing zoning was dishonest to current property owners. VOTE: FAILED 3:4, Councilors Clark, Taylor, Semple and Zelenka opposed. MOTION: Councilor Yeh, seconded by Councilor Syrett, moved to direct the City Manager to revise the draft ordinance to allow ADUs on alley -access lots in the R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 zones, subject to the same ADU standards that apply on regular (street access) lots in the same zone. o Councilor Clark -said he wanted a plan to catchup on the list of unimproved roads in need of repair; noted the motion, if passed, would result in increased wear on alleys. o Councilor Semple -asked whose responsibility it was to maintain the alleys; expressed concern about access to the home for people in wheelchairs when alleys were unpaved. o Councilor Zelenka - said ADUs aren't the panacea for the affordable housing crisis, but the details for how they would be built would impact neighbors; said he thought the impact of HB 2001 in the university area would be dramatically different than for other neighborhoods; voiced concern about marginal housing being razed and multiplexes being built on the same land; said he did not intend to support the motion. o Councilor Taylor - said she thought the legislation would impact the whole city —not just the university neighborhood —and result in higher housing prices for renters and buyers. o Councilor Syrett - noted that additional cars being driven on the alleys would only occur if the land owner provided an on -site parking spot for the ADU; expressed concern that the work session would result in the City being in violation of H132001; said she was discouraged by the tenor of the conversation. MINUTES — Eugene City Council October 23, 2019 Page 2 Work Session