CC Minutes - 09/12/05 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

next steps in the process and he thought the amendment provided that direction. He suggested adoption of the motion was more likely to ensure what was eventually proposed would be adopted by the council. Mr. Kelly said that it was often said that downtown was everyone's neighborhood, but the "ERAC was not everybody, by a long shot." He said he respected the committee's work, but it was primarily formed to consider urban renewal district issues, and it had "a particular kind of approach to it." Adding everyone's perspective in a brief but deep outreach process would give the council a richer mix of approaches to accomplish the goal of more closely aligning the goals of the code with the Downtown Plan. Mr. Pape noted his interest in having a public hearing early in the process to hear what the public thought about some of the items. The vote on the amendment to the motion was a 4:4 tie; Ms. Taylor, Mr. Kelly, Ms. Bett- man, and Ms. Ortiz voting yes; Mr. Pape, Ms. Solomon, Mr. Poling, and Mr. Pryor voting no. Mayor Piercy cast a vote in support of the amendment, and it passed on a final vote of 5:4. The amended motion passed unanimously, 8:0. C. WORK SESSION: Standards for Outdoor Smoking Areas The council was joined by Keli Osborn of the Planning and Development Department for the item. Ms. Osborn reminded the council it requested an additional work session on the subject prior to the public hearing scheduled on September 26. Ms. Osborn reviewed several issues that remained to be resolved. The first was, if outdoor smoking areas were to be allowed, where were they to be allowed? She said staff recommended they be allowed at establishments that serve food and beverages. She did not know how many such businesses were involved, but noted that the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) indicated there were about 220 businesses in Eugene with on-premise liquor licenses. The second issue was if outdoor smoking areas were allowed, how open should they be? Ms. Osborn said that council's responses had been mixed, but there seemed to be some support for 50 percent wall coverage. That percentage was included in the proposed ordinance. She acknowledged there was no scientific basis to that percentage. She noted that the ordinance attempted to address side coverings and wall coverings to avoid some of the confusion that arose over the 75/25 percent rule, which was not clear as to what was allowed. The third issue was how to address ventilation. Ms. Osborn said staff had provided some examples of how the issue was addressed in British Columbia and at the State of Oregon, but had provided no recommenda- tion that such systems be provided in outdoor smoking areas. Ms. Osborn discussed the issue of what happened to existing outdoor smoking areas if the council adopted new standards. She said that approximately 40 businesses had to secure a building permit for outdoor smoking areas while others were installed without permit because they required no structural changes. She said the ordinance suggested that after 12 months, all businesses must comply; alternatively, that period could be shorter, longer, or such businesses could be grandfathered in as legal nonconforming structures. Ms. Osborn believed that most of the establishments that had secured permits would require another building permit to reach a 50 percent openness standard. MINUTES-Eugene City Council Work Session September 12, 2005 Page 10