CC Minutes - 02/22/07 Joint Elected Officials

Home Browse Search

Ms. Bettman stated that the proposal was a “cart before the horse” situation where what the City assumed would be developed and what could be developed were very different, and the council would have no control over what happened. Mayor Piercy opened public testimony. Larry Reed , Principal with JRH Land Use Planning Company, represented Old Coburg Road LLC, the applicant. He was accompanied by Steve Ward, representing Old Coburg Road LLC. Mr. Reed spoke to Ms. Bettman’s questions, saying he took his professional responsibilities seriously and had asked his clients to allow him to meet with adjacent property owners. Subsequently, he held several meetings with adjacent land owners to discuss the proposal. He also held an open house and invited all residential and commercial property owners to that event to discuss the vision for the property and to solicit input. He met with the Board of Directors of the Crescent Meadows Home Owners association prior to writing the application. Mr. Reed said that the application discussed a PUD because the City had placed a PUD overlay on the property at some point in the past. Both he and the property owners were skeptical about the viability of any commercial uses on the property, but because the property was designated for a PUD and it was located on what was to be on the third of fourth phase of the EmX system, they decided it would be short-sighted not to include some limited commercial uses, such as a coffee shop, on the property. Mr. Reed responded to Mr. Biggs’ e-mail. He said the application record started when the application was deemed complete by the City, which was about the third week of August 2006. The notice was sent to surrounding property owners and interested parties the first week of October and it provided information on where the application could be reviewed and how to give testimony. Mr. Reed pointed out that Mr. Biggs had September and October to review the application and offer written testimony, but he did not. He had until the October 24 planning commissions hearing to consider and perfect his comments. An early February notice of the hearing before the elected officials had clearly indicated when materials should be submitted. In addition, Mr. Biggs did not have the courtesy to appear tonight to discuss his objections. Mr. Reed said Mr. Biggs apparently wanted time to review the record to find some issue he wished to raise in the next seven days. Mr. Reed said because the meeting was not an evidentiary hearing, under Oregon land use law the elected officials were not required to leave the record open. Prior to deciding whether to extend that courtesy to Mr. Biggs, he suggested the elected officials consider the following questions about Mr. Biggs’ standing: Was he an adjoining or close property owner? Did he somehow fail to receive notice? Was he a representative of a neighborhood organization or home owners association? And what were his reasons for the eleventh hour delay? If the elected officials decided Mr. Biggs had standing, Mr. Reed had no objection to a short delay of three or four days, but he did not think seven was necessary. He would need only a few days to respond to any testimony. Mr. Reed did not want the City to have to spend more money on additional notice and wanted his client to have some certainty. He invited questions. Zachary Vishanoff , Patterson Street, supported Mr. Biggs’ request to leave the record open as he thought any questions Mr. Biggs had would be good ones and it was “not too much to ask.” He suggested there was “stealth hospital zoning” being proposed. He thought zoning something in anticipation of an EmX corridor was like “waiting for Peter Pan to arrive.” MINUTES—Joint Elected Officials— February 22, 2007 Page 3 Lane Board of County Commissioners and Eugene City Council