Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Rayor pointed out that the draft was already full of exceptions that a savvy developer could <br />take advantage of. He doubted that staff would be able to connect streets to the degree needed <br />under the code. Mr. Rayor advocated for maximum block lengths for local streets, saying 600 <br />feet was too long but something was needed. <br /> <br />Although he shared Mr. Kelly's concerns about the topic, Mr. Meisner thought the distance of <br />1,500 feet in length from an existing intersection was too long for an exception. He agreed with <br />Ms. Nathanson's remarks. He said that as the community had annexed new areas, density had <br />declined. At some point, the community must remedy that lack of density, and street connectivity <br />was one tool to do so. <br /> <br />The council indicated majority support for staff examination of the two possible exceptions to <br />street connectivity standards mentioned by Mr. Kelly. Mr. Rayor did not favor further exceptions. <br />Ms. Childs confirmed that Mr. Kelly was only referring to automobile connectivity. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson wanted to address the issue of speeding traffic as a separate issue, and asked if <br />the City had a purpose statement related to connectivity. Ms. Bishow referred Ms. Nathanson to <br />page 253 of the draft code, which included purpose and intent statements. She noted that it was <br />now very difficult for developers to secure exceptions to the standards. Ms. Nathanson <br />suggested that speed could be addressed through new standards for street design and traffic <br />enforcement efforts. Ms. Childs said that the street connectivity standards were adopted when <br />the Local Street Plan was adopted; that plan included new standards for local streets that <br />included design features intended to slow traffic. <br /> <br />Ms. Bishow suggested that councilors send additional suggested changes to the draft code to <br />staff by the following week. Staff would review the changes and poll the council for consensus <br />around the suggestions, and the council could discuss the suggestions at the beginning of the <br />next work session, which was now scheduled for September 7. <br />The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />Jim Johnson <br />City Manager <br /> <br />(Recorded by KimberlyYoung) <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 26, 2000 Page 9 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />