Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Meisner noted there was no minimum density in the new R-1.5 zone and requested more <br />information about that recommendation. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner agreed with Ms. Nathanson that the city's existing zoning patterns made some of the <br />goals of the update hard to achieve, and reminded the council of the adoption of the Whiteaker <br />Plan, which had been highly controversial since it involved concurrent rezoning. <br /> <br />Mr. Meisner said he respected the debate that preceded the decision to impose minimum <br />densities on new development, but was curious about the consequences of that for older areas <br />of the city. He cited established central neighborhoods currently zoned R-2 as an example of his <br />concern, asking about the consequence of altering lot sizes to be either smaller or larger. He <br />asked how that requirement would change or improve present development practices, such as <br />the development of six unit apartment complexes with balconies overlooking the backyards of <br />established houses. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mayor Torrey, Ms. Childs said that the council's action in adopting <br />the code would be legislative in nature. She said that Planning staff would work with City <br />Manager's Office staff to ensure any e-mail messages sent to the council were part of the public <br />record. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly agreed with the remarks of Mr. Meisner and Ms. Nathanson regarding zoning patterns <br />as they related to City goals, and asked Planning Division staff to generate some ideas about <br />how to address that issue. <br /> <br />The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />Jim Johnson <br />City Manager <br /> <br />(Recorded by KimberlyYoung) <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 2000 Page 14 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />