Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Pryor, moved that the City Council adopt Council Bill 4940, an or- <br />dinance concerning Jefferson/Far West Plan Amendments. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to replace the first sentence of section 10 with the <br />following: <br /> “This ordinance will be automatically repealed upon the effective date of an Ordinance <br />adopted by the council that (a) establishes area-specific infill standards for the area regulated by <br />the Jefferson/far West Refinement Plan Residential Area Policy 15 and (b) references section 10 <br />of this ordinance.” <br /> <br />Ms. Harding pointed out that the amendment changed the ordinance so that it would not have a date certain <br />on the sunset clause and the matter could potentially be returned for council consideration. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Ms. Solomon, Ms. Harding affirmed that the repeal of the ordinance would <br />be dependent on another action, the adoption of the area specific infill standards. <br /> <br />Ms. Solomon said she was not confident that the area specific infill standards would be completed by <br />January 1. She preferred to leave in the automatic repeal date of 2009. <br /> <br />Mr. Zelenka asked what the downside was to not having an automatic repeal. City Manager Taylor replied <br />that the ordinance would have to come back before the council. Ms. Harding added that there were benefits <br />to both approaches. <br /> <br />Mr. Pryor liked deadlines because they helped keep an item on task. He preferred the original motion <br />because he felt it would give the council incentive to keep moving on it. <br /> <br />Mr. Clark concurred. He said not making the deadline would elucidate another problem that may need to be <br />addressed at that time. He asked Ms. Bettman to clarify her intent. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman averred that the intent of the ordinance was to protect the area while the standards were being <br />developed. She said rather than trying to gauge a specific date, she thought it would make more sense to tie <br />the sunset date to the completion of the work. She asked staff if it was feasible to meet the January deadline. <br /> <br />Ms. Harding responded that the infill standards work program had been released in a draft citizen <br />involvement plan and it had a target date of September 2008, for developing a first round of citywide infill <br />standards. She explained that the reason for this was that the direction for the work plan was to develop <br />infill standards for the City as a whole. She said staff would be looking to an advisory committee and to the <br />Planning Commission for direction regarding areas to prioritize for creating area specific standards, but had <br />not yet received such direction. She felt it was doable, however. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman asked if the ordinance would come before the council if it stood without the amendment and <br />had reached its sunset date. City Manager Taylor affirmed that staff would bring it to the council’s <br />attention along with a progress report on where the process was in order to recommend an amendment to <br />extend the time to a date specific. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor indicated her support for the amendment. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council March 12, 2007 Page 9 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />