CC Minutes - 05/24/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

amended in Attachment 2 of the staff notes for the item. This action is subject to approval by the Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners. Referring to page 77 of the meeting packet (Attachment 3), Mr. Kelly disagreed with the proposed revision calling for a five- to ten-year supply of serviced, buildable residential land. He noted that the planning commissions had recommended a five-year supply. He supported that recommendation because such forecasting demand was a challenging process due to ever- changing dynamics such as the economy, land use changes, changes to the systems development charges, and changes in density that might over time begin to have an effect on the way development occurred in Eugene. He feared that there could be public money expended to extend services to land that might not be needed. Mr. Kelly moved, seconded by Mr. Rayor, to amend the motion by eliminating the change to Policy 6 as shown on page 77. Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Mr. Kelly said that he would like to modify Finding 12 on page 76 to indicate that currently, State law does not aflow, rather than does not include, local systems development charges for fire and emergency medical service facilities and schools. Mr. Klein said that most people believed that the State statutes prohibit a city from enacting a systems development charge other than as allowed by State statute. He did not interpret the statute as including such a preemption. The City had home rule power to adopt any systems development charge it wished. He said that the statutes indicate local governments may authorize systems development charges for identified systems without expressly preempting local jurisdictions from charging for other systems. Mr. Klein said that the use of the word "allow" suggests that there is a preemption when there is not. Mr. Kelly withdrew his request to modify the text. Mr. Kelly referred to the new finding requested by the Homebuilders Association of Lane County on page 74, and said he had trouble with the phrase "making calculation of buildable land impossible." He suggested instead "making calculation of buildable land difficult." Mr. Kelly moved, seconded by Mr. Meisner, to amend the motion by revising the new finding on page 74 to replacing the phrase "making calculation of buildable land impossible" with "making calculation of buildable land difficult." Roll call vote; the motion passed unanimously, 6:0. Mr. Torrey referred to Policy 7 on page 77 and suggested that it be modified to indicate that development would pay its share of the cost of extending public services rather than a greater share of the cost of extending such services. Mr. Kelly said that Mr. Torrey made a good point, and asked for the source of the language. Mr. Croteau said that the issue was debated at the planning commissions level. He said that because the document was intended to cover the entire metropolitan area, the commissions selected the phrase "greater share" to acknowledge Eugene's Growth Management Study; the text was intentionally vague and intended to accommodate the goals and interests of all three jurisdictions. Mr. Pap8 suggested the council substitute "appropriate" or "fair" for "greater share" in Policy 7. Mr. Meisner also had some concerns about the use of "greater share," although he believed "the cost" was just as vague. He pointed out that the cost was not always greater, noting the recent MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1999 Page 7 5:30 p.m.