Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

1. More than 33 percent of the development site is occupied by the combined area of the /WR conservation setback and any portion of the Goal 5 Water Resource Site that ex- tends landward beyond the conservation setback; 2. The proposed reduction in the /WR conservation area will result in the combined area described above constituting at least 33 percent of the developable site; 3. The parcel is not already developed with a building suitable for occupancy; 4. The area of the subject parcel is 10,000 square feet or less; 5. The portion of the development site removed from the /WR conservation area complies with Eugene Code Section 9.4980(2)(a)(4), (4)(b), (5)(a), (8), and (10); 6. The portion of the development site outside the /WR conservation area, including the area removed, complies with Eugene Code Section 9.4980(7); 7. The portion of the development site that remains in a /WR conservation setback area complies with Eugene Code Section 9.4980(1) through (5) 8. The reduction occurs first by reducing the area of any portion of the resource site that extends landyard beyond the conservation setback. If additional reduction in the /WR conservation area is needed to reduce the combined area to 33 percent of the develop- ment site area, the conservation setback described in Eugene Code Section 9.4920(1)(b) may be reduced the minimum necessary to meet the standard in subsection 2; and 9. The proposed adjustment is consistent with Eugene Code Section 9.8030(21)(e). Councilor Kelly said the amendment would primarily affect small parcels. The intent of the amendment was to avoid the creation of an undevelopable lot. The amendment fine-tuned the proposed code language by restricting it to lots of 10,000 feet or less and lots not already developed with a building suitable for occupancy. Councilor Papé noted that staff did not support the amendment. He requested an explanation. Mr. Björklund said the staff response was based on the fact that the 33-percent threshold adjustment was the only mechanism it could develop to address certain lots along the Willamette River that staff was aware of and that the council received testimony regarding. In those cases, the setback consumed more than 33 percent of a lot. Staff examined every option it could think of regarding how to provide relief in such a case. In one case, a property owner would not be able to expand a front porch by a foot because it would result in a violation of the conservation area. There were problems with every alternative staff developed. Mr. Björklund said that staff believed there would be other situations it did not anticipate where the regulations would not make sense, and staff did not want to limit the section to undeveloped parcels. For that reason, staff believed the 33 percent adjustment should be allowed to be applied to developed parcels. Councilor Papé asked if the amendment could result in lawsuits. City Attorney Emily Jerome indicated that such instances were not likely to be common but she believed the City would prevail in the case of a legal challenge. Councilor Kelly said he had indicated in his communication with staff that he did not object to exempting the specific properties along the Willamette River from the natural resource ordinance. The issue for him was that there 2,000 lots and the City was unaware of all the situations that would arise, which was his reason for proposing the amendment. It could be there was a large lot with some development that would receive a substantial reduction in the protected conservation area. Councilor Solomon expressed support for the alternative motion offered by staff. Councilor Pryor asked if the effect of the amendment would be to reduce or increase a property owner’s flexibility in developing their property. Mr. Björklund said the amendment would narrow the number of MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 14, 2005 Page 12 Regular Meeting